IVC Filter Complications

Published on September 9, 2015 by Sandy Liebhard

Text-Size:A A A+

The nationwide law firm of Bernstein Liebhard LLP is now investigating dangerous IVC filter complications that may have been sustained by the recipients of C.R. Bard, Inc.’s retrievable inferior vena cava filters. Dozens of lawsuits have already been filed in courts around the country on behalf of patients who allegedly experienced vein and organ perforation, migration and breakage, embolization and other serious adverse events due to Bard’s Recovery and G2 IVC filters. If you or a loved one suffered similar harm, please contact our office today to learn more about the legal options available to you.

Adverse Events Associated with IVC Filter

C.R. Bard’s retrievable IVC filter products are designed to be implanted in the inferior vena cava, where they prevent blood clots from traveling to the lungs. While these types of devices are intended to be removed from a patient’s body once the threat of blood clots has passed, a 2013 study published in the Journal of American Medical Association suggested that retrieval was successful in fewer than 10% of patients, while 18.3% of retrieval attempts failed. The majority of filters were allowed to remain in patients longer than medically necessary.ivc filter complications

In 2010, the U.S. Food & Drug Administration revealed that it had received more than 900 reports of IVC filter complications in patients who had received retrievable devices, and expressed concern that they were not being removed as recommended. More than 300 of those reports involved cases of device migration. The FDA also received 146 reports of fracture and embolization, 70 cases of inferior vena cava perforation, and 56 reports of filter fracture. In May 2014, the FDA issued a second alert emphasizing that retrievable IVC filters should be removed within 29 to 54 days after implantation

Complications Allegedly Linked With Bard IVC Filters

C.R. Bard brought the Recovery IVC Filter to market in 2003, but stopped selling the product in 2005. According to a report that aired on NBC Nightly News in September 2015, Recovery filters were associated with more than 300 non-fatal injuries over the course of a decade. During that time period, the devices were also implicated in 27 deaths.

The G2 IVC Filter System replaced C.R. Bard’s Recovery product in 2005, with the company promising that it was more resistant to fracture and migration. However, a study published in the August 2010 issue of the Archives of Internal Medicine suggested the Bard G2 IVC filter fracture rate was 12%.

Scores of plaintiffs are now pursuing lawsuits over IVC filter complications allegedly associated with Bard’s Recovery and G2 products. In August 2015, the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) consolidated all federally-filed claims involving the company’s retrievable IVC filter products in a multidistrict litigation and transferred the docket to the U.S. District Court, District of Arizona for the purpose of coordinated pretrial proceedings. Now that these claims have been centralized, some legal experts believe that the litigation is likely to grow.

Lawyers Evaluating Claims over Alleged IVC Filter Complications

The attorneys at Bernstein Liebhard LLP are now offering free, no-obligations legal consultations to the alleged victims of serious IVC filter complications. To learn more and to arrange to have your case evaluated, please call .

Web Analytics