Skip to content

Clareon PanOptix Pro PXCAT0 (REF PXCAT0.195)Recalls & reported problems

Alcon Laboratories, Inc. · CL PANOPTIX PRO ATME UVA · Class 3 · Implant

All models of Clareon PanOptix Pro (222)

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

Adverse event reports
4
Deaths reported
0
Injuries reported
3
Recalls naming it
0

Summary

The FDA's MAUDE database contains 4 adverse event reports that list this exact device (DI 00380658490331), received between Oct 29, 2025 and Aug 7, 2026 — classified as 3 injuries, 1 malfunction.

The most frequently reported specific device problem is “Device Difficult to Setup or Prepare” (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: 1 reportsNov 2025: 0 reportsDec 2025: 0 reportsJan 2026: 1 reportsFeb 2026: 1 reportsMar 2026: 0 reportsApr 2026: 0 reportsMay 2026: 0 reportsJun 2026: 0 reportsJul 2026: 0 reportsAug 2026: 1 reportsSep 2026: 0 reportsOct 2026: 0 reports2024202520261
Last 36 months. The most recent month may be incomplete.

Most reported problems

Device problems

  • Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem3
  • Device Difficult to Setup or Prepare1

Patient problems

  • Blurred Vision2
  • Visual Disturbances2
  • Insufficient Information1
  • No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions1

Recent adverse event reports

The 4 most recent of 4 reports, in the reporter's own words as published by the FDA.

  • InjuryAug 7, 2026Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem

    A non-health professional reported that following surgery, the patient experienced blurry visual acuity (VA),dysphotopsia left eye (OS). The clinical reason for explant was dysphotopsia. The IOL was replaced with another company lens. As a result, the intraocular lens (IOL) was explanted 4 months, 4 days after the initial implant procedure.There are two medical reports associated with this patient. This file belongs to right eye.Additional information has been requested but is not available at the time of this report.

    Patient problems: Blurred Vision; Visual Disturbances

    MAUDE report 50176466 ↗
  • InjuryFeb 5, 2026Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem

    A FACILITY REPRESENTATIVE REPORTED THAT FOLLOWING AN INTRAOCULAR LENS (IOL) IMPLANTATION PROCEDURE, THE PATIENT EXPERIENCED DIFFICULTY WITH BOTH DISTANCE AND INTERMEDIATE (COMPUTER) VISION. THE IOL WAS SUBSEQUENTLY EXPLANTED AND REPLACED WITH A MONOFOCAL LENS DURING A SECONDARY PROCEDURE. THE CLINICAL REASON FOR THE EXPLANT WAS IDENTIFIED AS A MECHANICAL COMPLICATION OF THE ORIGINAL IOL. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION WAS REQUESTED.

    Patient problems: Blurred Vision

    MAUDE report 24268804 ↗
  • MalfunctionJan 16, 2026Device Difficult to Setup or Prepare

    ADDITIONAL INFORMATION WAS RECEIVED STATING THAT, THE SURGERY WAS COMPLETED USING BACK UP LENS WITHOUT ANY HARM TO THE PATIENT.

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

    MAUDE report 24092813 ↗
  • InjuryOct 29, 2025Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem; Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem

    A FACILITY REPRESENTATIVE REPORTED THAT AFTER INTRAOCULAR LENS (IOL) IMPLANTATION, THE PATIENT EXPERIENCED DYSPHOTOPSIA. THE LENS WAS REMOVED AND REPLACED WITH A NON-COMPANY LENS IN A SECONDARY PROCEDURE. THE CLINICAL REASON FOR EXPLANT WAS ALSO CITED AS DYSPHOTOPSIA. THE PATIENT'S SYMPTOMS WERE RESOLVED, AND THE SURGEON REPORTED A GOOD PROGNOSIS. THERE WAS NO FURTHER IMPACT TO THE PATIENT.

    Patient problems: Visual Disturbances

    MAUDE report 23412782 ↗

Other Lens, Multifocal Intraocular devices

All Lens, Multifocal Intraocular devices →

Sources and updates

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