Skip to content

Clareon CNWET5 (UDI 00380652467230)Recalls & reported problems

Alcon Laboratories, Inc. · Clareon Vivity Toric · Class 3 · Implant

All models of Clareon (1142)

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

Adverse event reports
1
Deaths reported
0
Injuries reported
1
Recalls naming it
0

Summary

The FDA's MAUDE database contains 1 adverse event report that list this exact device (DI 00380652467230), received between Jan 13, 2026 and Jan 13, 2026 — classified as 1 injury.

The most frequently reported specific device problem is “Material Split, Cut or Torn” (1 report).

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: 0 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: 0 reportsSep 2025: 0 reportsOct 2025: 0 reportsNov 2025: 0 reportsDec 2025: 0 reportsJan 2026: 1 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 reports2024202520261
Last 36 months. The most recent month may be incomplete.

Most reported problems

Device problems

  • Material Split, Cut or Torn1
  • Optical Decentration1

Patient problems

  • Insufficient Information1
  • No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions1

Recent adverse event reports

The 1 most recent of 1 reports, in the reporter's own words as published by the FDA.

  • InjuryJan 13, 2026Optical Decentration; Material Split, Cut or Torn

    A NON HEALTHCARE PROFESSIONAL REPORTED THAT THE FIRST LENS HAD TO BE EXPLANTED BECAUSE IT WAS DAMAGED BY THE INJECTOR. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION HAS BEEN REQUESTED AND RECEIVED STATING THAT THE, DURING INITIAL SURGERY, IOL DID NOT CENTER INITIALLY IN THE OR BUT WITH ROTATION LOOKED CENTERED. NO DAMAGE TO THE IOL WAS NOTED AT THAT TIME. THERE WAS A SLIGHT DECENTRATION POST OPERATIVE DAY ONE AND WAS WORSEN, SO A REPOSITIONING OR EXCHANGE WAS BROKEN. INTRAOPERATIVELY IT WAS NOTED THAT THERE WAS A TEAR IN THE IOL AT ONE OPTIC/HAPTIC JUNCTION SO THE IOL WAS REMOVED IN ONE PIECE AND EXCHANGED WITH A NEW IOL WITHOUT COMPLICATIONS. IT WAS REPORTED THAT THE IOL WAS IN GOOD POSITION.

    Patient problems: Insufficient Information; No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions

    MAUDE report 24051656 ↗

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