Skip to content

iSert Intraocular Lens 250 (clear), +18.00DRecalls & reported problems

Hoya Medical Singapore Pte. Ltd. · Class 3 · Implant

All models of iSert Intraocular Lens (69)

Data updated Oct 18, 2026 from official FDA records · Editorial policy

Adverse event reports
7
Deaths reported
0
Injuries reported
4
Recalls naming it
0

Summary

The FDA's MAUDE database contains 7 adverse event reports that list this exact device (DI 04547480480749), received between Dec 7, 2015 and Jul 30, 2025 — classified as 4 injuries, 3 malfunctions.

The most frequently reported specific device problem is “Break” (4 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 18, 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: 1 reportsJan 2025: 0 reportsFeb 2025: 0 reportsMar 2025: 0 reportsApr 2025: 0 reportsMay 2025: 0 reportsJun 2025: 0 reportsJul 2025: 1 reportsAug 2025: 0 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 reports2024202520261
Last 36 months. The most recent month may be incomplete.

Most reported problems

Device problems

  • Break4
  • Detachment Of Device Component2
  • Material Split, Cut or Torn2
  • Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem1

Patient problems

  • Failure of Implant3
  • No Code Available2
  • No Known Impact Or Consequence To Patient2

Recent adverse event reports

The 7 most recent of 7 reports, in the reporter's own words as published by the FDA.

  • InjuryJul 30, 2025Material Split, Cut or Torn; Material Split, Cut or Torn

    EVENT OCCURRED IN MALAYSIA. DAMAGED HAPTIC AFTER IMPLANTATION. TRAILING. WOUND STRETCH; INCREASED INCISION SIZE. PRODUCT REPLACED WITH ANOTHER LENS IMMEDIATELY DURING SURGERY. PATIENT HEALTH NOT IMPACTED. IOL WAS EXPLANTED ON (B)(6) 2025. PROBLEM CODE: A0414 - MATERIAL SPLIT, CUT OR TORN.

    Patient problems: Failure of Implant

    MAUDE report 22672098 ↗
  • InjuryDec 27, 2024Material Split, Cut or Torn; Material Split, Cut or Torn

    EVENT OCCURRED IN MALAYSIA. DAMAGED HAPTIC AFTER IMPLANTATION. TRAILING; MIDDLE. CORNEAL EDEMA. INCREASED INCISION SIZE. PRODUCT REPLACED WITH ANOTHER LENS IMMEDIATELY DURING SURGERY. PATIENT HEALTH NOT IMPACTED. PATIENT HAS RECOVERED AND IS FINE. IOL WAS EXPLANTED ON (B)(6) 2024. PROBLEM CODE: A0414 - MATERIAL SPLIT, CUT OR TORN.

    Patient problems: Failure of Implant

    MAUDE report 21031282 ↗
  • InjuryMay 24, 2022Break; Break

    DAMAGED HAPTIC AFTER IMPLANTATION. TORN TRAILING HAPTIC. DEVICE EXPLANTED. PATIENT HEALTH NOT IMPACTED; PATIENT HAS RECOVERED AND IS FINE; NO PERMANENT OR NEGATIVE IMPACT ON PATIENT HEALTH EXPECTED.

    Patient problems: Failure of Implant

    MAUDE report 14482099 ↗
  • MalfunctionNov 7, 2018Break; Break

    TRAILING HAPTIC EXTENDED AFTER LOADING, SURGEON INFORMED AND CHECKED LENS, SURGEON INSERTED LENS BUT TRAILING HAPTIC SNAPPED. SO IT WAS REMOVED AND NEW LENS INSERTED. NEW LENS WAS IMPLANTED WITHOUT ANY COMPLICATION. PATIENT IMPACT: ONLY LENGTHENING OF PROCEDURE.

    Patient problems: No Known Impact Or Consequence To Patient

    MAUDE report 8049156 ↗
  • InjuryJul 28, 2017Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem

    IT WAS REPORTED THAT A LENS HAS BEEN EXPLANTED. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION HAS BEEN REQUESTED BUT HAS NOT YET BEEN RECEIVED.

    Patient problems: No Code Available

    MAUDE report 6751947 ↗
  • MalfunctionDec 7, 2015Break; Detachment Of Device Component

    THE TRAILING HAPTIC SNAPPED OFF WHEN THE DOCTOR WAS INJECTING THE LENS INTO THE EYE. THIS IS THE SECOND LENS THAT WAS IMPLANTED INTO THIS PATIENT WITH THE SAME OUTCOME.

    Patient problems: No Known Impact Or Consequence To Patient

    MAUDE report 5271928 ↗
  • MalfunctionDec 7, 2015Break; Detachment Of Device Component

    THE TRAILING HAPTIC SNAPPED OFF WHEN THE DOCTOR WAS INJECTING THE LENS INTO THE EYE. THE INCISION WAS WIDENED IN ORDER TO EXPLANT THE LENS.

    Patient problems: No Code Available

    MAUDE report 5271923 ↗

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