Skip to content

TECNIS IOL ZCU150 (REF ZCU150U170)Recalls & reported problems

Johnson & Johnson Surgical Vision, Inc. · TECNIS TORIC II 1-PC 17.0D CYL1.50 · Class 3 · Implant

All models of TECNIS IOL (1344)

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

Adverse event reports
2
Deaths reported
0
Injuries reported
1
Recalls naming it
0

Summary

The FDA's MAUDE database contains 2 adverse event reports that list this exact device (DI 05050474657731), received between Jul 28, 2020 and May 2, 2023 — classified as 1 injury, 1 malfunction.

The most frequently reported specific device problem is “Mechanical Jam” (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 18, 2026.

Most reported problems

Device problems

  • Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem1
  • Mechanical Jam1
  • Scratched Material1

Patient problems

  • Blurred Vision1
  • No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions1
  • No Code Available1

Recent adverse event reports

The 2 most recent of 2 reports, in the reporter's own words as published by the FDA.

  • MalfunctionMay 2, 2023Mechanical Jam; Scratched Material; Mechanical Jam; Scratched Material

    IT WAS REPORTED THAT AN INTRAOCULAR LENS (IOL) WAS PARTIALLY INSERTED IN THE PATIENT'S LEFT EYE. WAS NOTED TO BE REMOVED AND REPLACED DURING THE SAME PROCEDURE DUE TO SCRATCHED IOL AND IOL WAS STUCK IN CARTRIDGE. THERE WAS NO INCISION ENLARGEMENT, NO VITRECTOMY AND NO SUTURES PERFORMED. PROCEDURE SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETED USING BACK-UP IOL. NO OTHER INFORMATION WAS PROVIDED.

    Patient problems: No Clinical Signs, Symptoms or Conditions

    MAUDE report 16856836 ↗
  • InjuryJul 28, 2020Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem; Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem

    IT WAS REPORTED THAT THE PATIENT WAS NOT CONFIDENT THAT CORRECT INTRAOCULAR LENS (IOL) WAS PLACED IN HIS EYE AS HE FEELS THAT THE SERIAL NUMBER ON BOX DOES NOT MATCH WHAT IS IN HIS EYE. THE PATIENT REPORTED HE WAS OVER OVERCORRECTED A COUPLE OF DIOPTERS. THROUGH FOLLOW-UP, IT WAS LEARNED THAT THE PATIENT NEEDS READING GLASSES FOR READING AND DISTANCE VISION, BECAUSE HE IS NOT SEEING CLEAR. THE PATIENT STATED HIS DOCTOR TOLD HIM HE IS HALF DIOPTER OVER-CORRECTED. HIS DOCTOR USED THE ORA TO DO THE CALCULATIONS. HE SAID SURGERY WAS FINE AND HE IS HEALING FINE, BUT WONDERS IF THERE IS SOMETHING WRONG WITH THE LENS. PATIENT MENTIONED HE HAD LASIK 25 YEARS AGO. FURTHER FOLLOW-UP CONFIRMED THE PATIENT HAD HIS LENS EXPLANTED AND REPLACED WITH ANOTHER LENS. THE PATIENT STATED HE IS HAPPY WITH THE OUTCOME. NO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION WAS PROVIDED.

    Patient problems: Blurred Vision; No Code Available

    MAUDE report 10335928 ↗

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