Skip to content

Clareon CNW0T5 (UDI 00380652410571)Recalls & reported problems

Alcon Laboratories, Inc. · CLAREON BLF TORIC · Class 3 · Implant

All models of Clareon (1142)

Data updated Oct 16, 2026 from official FDA records · Editorial policy

Adverse event reports
3
Deaths reported
0
Injuries reported
0
Recalls naming it
0

Summary

The FDA's MAUDE database contains 3 adverse event reports that list this exact device (DI 00380652410571), received between Mar 14, 2024 and Aug 29, 2025 — classified as 3 malfunctions.

The most frequently reported specific device problem is “Break” (2 reports).

Reports come from manufacturers, hospitals and patients and are not verified by the FDA. A report does not prove the device caused the event, and counts can't be used to compare devices or estimate failure rates. What reports can and can't tell you · How this data works · Data updated Oct 16, 2026.

Reports received per month

Nov 2023: 0 reportsDec 2023: 0 reportsJan 2024: 0 reportsFeb 2024: 0 reportsMar 2024: 1 reportsApr 2024: 0 reportsMay 2024: 0 reportsJun 2024: 0 reportsJul 2024: 0 reportsAug 2024: 0 reportsSep 2024: 0 reportsOct 2024: 0 reportsNov 2024: 0 reportsDec 2024: 0 reportsJan 2025: 0 reportsFeb 2025: 0 reportsMar 2025: 0 reportsApr 2025: 0 reportsMay 2025: 0 reportsJun 2025: 0 reportsJul 2025: 0 reportsAug 2025: 2 reportsSep 2025: 0 reportsOct 2025: 0 reportsNov 2025: 0 reportsDec 2025: 0 reportsJan 2026: 0 reportsFeb 2026: 0 reportsMar 2026: 0 reportsApr 2026: 0 reportsMay 2026: 0 reportsJun 2026: 0 reportsJul 2026: 0 reportsAug 2026: 0 reportsSep 2026: 0 reportsOct 2026: 0 reports2024202520262
Last 36 months. The most recent month may be incomplete.

Most reported problems

Device problems

  • Break2
  • Defective Device1

Patient problems

  • Insufficient Information3

Recent adverse event reports

The 3 most recent of 3 reports, in the reporter's own words as published by the FDA.

  • MalfunctionAug 29, 2025Break; Break

    A PHYSICIAN REPORTED THAT DURING AN INTRAOCULAR LENS (IOL) IMPLANT PROCEDURE, FIRST COMPANY LENS WAS INSERTED AN THE HAPTIC WAS TORN. IT WAS THEN REMOVED FROM THE EYE. A BACKUP LENS OF SAME DIOPTER AND MODEL WAS INSERTED, AGAIN THE HAPTIC WAS TORN AN THE BACKUP LENS WAS REMOVED FROM THE EYE. ANOTHER COMPANY LENS WAS USED AND COMPLETED THE PROCEDURE. IT WAS ALL WITHIN THE SAME PROCEDURE, ASTIGMATISM COULD NOT BE CORRECTED WITH THE INSERTED LENS OTHERWISE THERE WOULD BE NO IMPAIRMENT. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION HAS BEEN REQUESTED.

    Patient problems: Insufficient Information

    MAUDE report 22922523 ↗
  • MalfunctionAug 29, 2025Break; Break

    A PHYSICIAN REPORTED THAT DURING AN INTRAOCULAR LENS (IOL) IMPLANT PROCEDURE, FIRST COMPANY LENS WAS INSERTED AN THE HAPTIC WAS TORN. IT WAS THEN REMOVED FROM THE EYE. A BACKUP LENS OF SAME DIOPTER AND MODEL WAS INSERTED, AGAIN THE HAPTIC WAS TORN AN THE BACKUP LENS WAS REMOVED FROM THE EYE. ANOTHER COMPANY LENS WAS USED AND COMPLETED THE PROCEDURE. IT WAS ALL WITHIN THE SAME PROCEDURE; ASTIGMATISM COULD NOT BE CORRECTED WITH THE INSERTED LENS OTHERWISE THERE WOULD BE NO IMPAIRMENT. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION HAS BEEN REQUESTED.

    Patient problems: Insufficient Information

    MAUDE report 22922520 ↗
  • MalfunctionMar 14, 2024Defective Device; Defective Device

    A NON HEALTH CARE PROFESSIONAL REPORTED THAT DURING AN INTRAOCULAR LENS (IOL) IMPLANT PROCEDURE, THE LENS WAS FOUND TO BE DEFECTIVE. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION HAS BEEN REQUESTED.

    Patient problems: Insufficient Information

    MAUDE report 18904228 ↗

Other intraocular lens devices

All intraocular lens devices →

Sources and updates

How reports and recalls are matched · Editorial policy · Report an error on this page