TECNIS IOL ZMA00 (REF ZMA00U0155)Recalls & reported problems
Johnson & Johnson Surgical Vision, Inc. · TECNIS MF 3- PIECE 6.0MM 15.5 US · Class 3 · Implant
All models of TECNIS IOL (1344)
Data updated Oct 16, 2026 from official FDA records · Editorial policy
- Adverse event reports
- 4
- Deaths reported
- 0
- Injuries reported
- 4
- Recalls naming it
- 0
Summary
The FDA's MAUDE database contains 4 adverse event reports that list this exact device (DI 05050474536715), received between Oct 11, 2016 and Feb 21, 2020 — classified as 4 injuries.
The most frequently reported specific device problem is “Device Dislodged or Dislocated” (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.
Most reported problems
Device problems
- Device Dislodged or Dislocated2
- Unintended Movement2
- Difficult or Delayed Positioning1
- Kinked1
Patient problems
- No Code Available3
- Visual Disturbances2
- Blurred Vision1
- Vitrectomy1
Recent adverse event reports
The 4 most recent of 4 reports, in the reporter's own words as published by the FDA.
InjuryFeb 21, 2020Device Dislodged or Dislocated; Unintended Movement; Device Dislodged or Dislocated; Unintended Movement
IT WAS REPORTED THAT THE PATIENT COMPLAINED OF BLURRY VISION, SEEING A BLUE RING AROUND OBJECTS, AND POOR NEAR VISION. DURING A FOLLOW UP VISIT ON (B)(6) 2020, IT WAS OBSERVED THAT THE INTRAOCULAR LENS (IOL) HAD DISLOCATED AND WAS OUT OF THE VISUAL AXIS. THE LENS WAS REPOSITIONED THE FOLLOWING DAY. ON (B)(6) 2020 THE LENS HAD DISLOCATED AGAIN, THEREFORE, THE LENS WAS EXPLANTED THEN DISCARDED. THERE WAS NO VITRECTOMY, INCISION ENLARGEMENT OR SUTURES REQUIRED. A NON-JOHNSON & JOHNSON LENS WAS IMPLANTED AS A REPLACEMENT. THE PATIENT IS DOING FINE POST-OPERATIVELY. NO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION WAS PROVIDED.
Patient problems: Blurred Vision; No Code Available; Visual Disturbances
MAUDE report 9738759 ↗InjuryMar 27, 2019Device Dislodged or Dislocated; Device Dislodged or Dislocated
IT WAS REPORTED THAT TECNIS MULTIFOCAL INTRAOCULAR LENS (MODEL ZMA00 +15.5 DIOPTER) WAS EXPLANTED FROM PATIENT¿S LEFT EYE BECAUSE OF DECENTERED LENS. THERE WAS NO PATIENT INJURY, NO VITRECTOMY, NO INCISION ENLARGEMENT REQUIRED. LENS FROM ANOTHER MANUFACTURER WAS USED AS REPLACEMENT LENS FOR THE PATIENT. PATIENT WAS HAPPY WITH VISION POST OPERATIVELY. NO FURTHER INFORMATION PROVIDED.
Patient problems: No Code Available
MAUDE report 8454814 ↗InjuryOct 26, 2016Unintended Movement; Unintended Movement
IT WAS REPORTED THAT THE ZMA00 INTRAOCULAR LENS (IOL) WAS REMOVED/EXPLANTED FROM A MALE PATIENT'S LEFT (OS) EYE AS IT WAS DECENTERED. IT WAS NOTED THAT THE LENS WAS DECENTERED THE WEEK OF (B)(6) 2016, AND THE DOCTOR CENTERED THE IOL. THE IOL BECAME DECENTERED AGAIN THE FOLLOWING WEEK AND THE PATIENT GOT DOUBLE VISION. THE PATIENT WAS SCHEDULED FOR SURGERY ON (B)(6) 2016, THE IOL WAS REMOVED AND ANOTHER MANUFACTURER'S LENS WAS IMPLANTED AS A REPLACEMENT. IT WAS NOTED THAT THE REASON FOR THE IOL DECENTRATION WAS UNKNOWN. THERE WERE NO INCISION ENLARGEMENT, VITRECTOMY AND/OR SUTURES REQUIRED. THERE WAS NO PATIENT INJURY POST-OP REPORTED. NO FURTHER INFORMATION WAS PROVIDED.
Patient problems: No Code Available; Visual Disturbances
MAUDE report 6059395 ↗InjuryOct 11, 2016Difficult or Delayed Positioning; Kinked; Difficult or Delayed Positioning; Kinked
IT WAS REPORTED THAT AFTER INJECTION OF AN INTRAOCULAR LENS, MODEL ZMA00, 15.0 DIOPTER, SURGEON WAS POSITIONING THE LENS AND THE BACK HAPTIC TORE OFF DURING THE MANIPULATION. THE LENS WAS PULLED OUT OF THE EYE AND A VITRECTOMY WAS CONDUCTED. IT WAS NOTED THAT WHEN THE HAPTIC TORE OFF, IT BECOME COMPLETELY DETACHED FROM THE OPTIC. AT THAT POINT A SECOND INTRAOCULAR LENS, MODEL ZMA00, 15.5 DIOPTER WAS OPENED AND DURING INJECTION OF THIS LENS, THE FRONT HAPTIC GOT STUCK IN THE INJECTOR AND FOLDED ON TOP OF THE OPTIC AND WAS KINKED ONCE THE LENS WAS PUSHED ALL THE WAY OUT. THIS LENS WAS THEN CUT OUT OF THE EYE AND AGAIN A VITRECTOMY WAS CONDUCTED. A REPLACEMENT LENS (14.5 DIOPTER) WAS THEN INJECTED INTO THE EYE WITH NO PROBLEM. THERE WAS NO INCISION ENLARGEMENT AND NO SUTURE WAS REQUIRED. THIS REPORT IS TO CAPTURE THE EVENT OF THE SECOND LENS USED, ZMA00 15.5 DIOPTER. A SEPARATE MDR WILL BE FILED TO CAPTURE THE EVENT RELATED TO THE FIRST LENS USED, ZMA00 15.0 DIOPTER.
Patient problems: Vitrectomy
MAUDE report 6019608 ↗
Other LENS, MULTIFOCAL INTRAOCULAR devices
- Clareon™ CNA0T0Alcon Laboratories, Inc. · Lens, multifocal intraocular144 reports
- Clareon™ CNA0T0Alcon Laboratories, Inc. · Lens, multifocal intraocular1 recall66 reports
- Clareon™ CNA0T0Alcon Laboratories, Inc. · Lens, multifocal intraocular113 reports
- Clareon™ CNA0T0Alcon Laboratories, Inc. · Lens, multifocal intraocular112 reports
- Clareon™ CNA0T0Alcon Laboratories, Inc. · Lens, multifocal intraocular110 reports
- Clareon™ CNA0T0Alcon Laboratories, Inc. · Lens, multifocal intraocular107 reports
- Clareon™ CNA0T0Alcon Laboratories, Inc. · Lens, multifocal intraocular104 reports
- Clareon™ CNA0T0Alcon Laboratories, Inc. · Lens, multifocal intraocular93 reports
Sources and updates
- Device record: FDA GUDID, file dated Oct 13, 2026 · View this device in AccessGUDID ↗
- Adverse event reports: FDA MAUDE, file dated Oct 14, 2026 · each report above links to its original FDA record
- Recalls: FDA Medical Device Recalls, file dated Oct 16, 2026
- Page last rebuilt: Oct 16, 2026. Data downloaded through openFDA, which notes it is not validated for clinical or regulatory use.
How reports and recalls are matched · Editorial policy · Report an error on this page