How To Join the IVC Filter Litigation at No Cost To You

To sign up now, please complete the quick form on this page.

Patients who received a retrievable IVC filter to reduce their risk of blood clots and pulmonary embolism are pursing financial compensation from C.R. Bard, Cook Medical, and other IVC filter device makers for serious and potentially life-threatening side effects.

If you believe you have been harmed by alleged IVC filter side effects or your device was failed to be removed within the time recommended by the FDA, you, too, may be eligible for financial compensation for your injuries, medical expenses, pain and suffering, and other damages.

The IVC filter litigation is still in its early stages, and product liability lawyers are investigating new claims on behalf of injured individuals every day, but it’s important to note that there is a statute of limitations in place for each state, a law that regulates the amount of time an individual has to pursue compensation for injuries from a medical product.

Why are Lawsuits being Filed Against IVC Filter Device Makers?

Hundreds of product liability lawsuits have already been brought against IVC filter manufacturers C.R. Bard and Cook Medical, alleging negligence, design defects, failure to warn, manufacturing defects, negligent misrepresentation and breach of implied warranty on the part of the medical device makers. In February 2015, just 10 days after trial began, C.R. Bard settled a product liability lawsuit filed by an IVC filter recipient who alleged that the Bard Recovery filter broke inside his body. According to allegations raised in the IVC filter lawsuit, one of the filter struts, or legs, became separated from the device and traveled to his heart, perforating it. He subsequently required open heart surgery, after which he underwent a lengthy recovery.

It has been determined that inferior vena cava filters manufactured by C.R. Bard, Cook Medical and some other device IVC filter device companies may be defectively designed, and may expose patients to an unnecessary risk of serious side effects and in many cases actually have very little benefit to the recipients. Common complications include device fracture, perforation of the inferior vena cava, migration of the filter to other parts of the body and the filters being deemed difficult, impossible or dangerous to remove. In many cases it has been theorized that any retrievable device left in place longer than approximately 50 days is at serious risk for these complications and the longer they are left in the more dangerous they become.

How Do IVC Filters Work?

Inferior vena cava (IVC) filters are medical devices surgically inserted in the inferior vena cava – the largest vein in the body – to capture blood clots and prevent them from traveling to the heart and lungs and causing a pulmonary embolism (PE). IVC filters are often used in patients who are unable to take anticoagulant medications due to an adverse reaction or uncontrollable bleeding event, or for patients who have suffered recurrent deep vein thrombosis (DVT) while taking a blood-thinning medication. Retrievable IVC filters are designed to provide short-term protection against blood clots and pulmonary embolism, and are intended to be removed once the risk of PE has subsided.

FDA Warnings for IVC Filter Recipients

Although retrievable IVC filters were developed in response to concerns about the long-term complications of permanent blood clot filters, which aren’t designed to be removed at all, the temporary filters have been linked to their fair share of problems, like damaging veins and migrating out of position after implantation. According to a 2010 safety announcement issued by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the agency had received 921 reports of adverse events involving IVC filters from 2005 to 2010, including 328 reports of device migration, 146 reports of embolization, 70 reports of vena cava perforation, and 56 reports of filter fracture.

According to the FDA’s safety alert, the agency “is concerned that retrievable IVC filters, intended for short-term placement, are not always removed once a patient’s risk for PE subsides.” The FDA also indicated that “known long term risks associated with IVC filters include but are not limited to lower limb deep vein thrombosis (DVT), filter fracture, filter migration, filter embolization and IVC perforation. In 2014, the FDA issued another IVC filter safety communication, this time advising that “implanting physicians and clinicians responsible for the ongoing care of patients with retrievable IVC filters consider removing the filter as soon as protection from pulmonary embolism is no longer needed.”

Consumer Safety Watch can help you qualify for free legal representation from an expert IVC filter injury attorney

Some attorneys representing potential claimants in the IVC filter litigation offer free confidential consultations, which means you can discuss your case with a knowledgeable lawyer for fee, before you decide whether to move forward with your claim, and we can also generally connect you with a firm that operates on a contingency basis, which means only if you successfully recover damages from the medical device maker will your lawyer get paid. These cases are unique from class action cases in the sense that the plaintiff and not the attorney gets the majority of the winnings when there is a verdict or settlement in their favor. If you received an IVC filter in the past, and you have since suffered complications like filter migration, filter fracture, perforation of the inferior vena cava, or the IVC filter simply has not been removed within the appropriate amount of time, please contact us today at 877-959-1042 or by completing the form on this page to connect with an experienced IVC filter injury lawyer for legal assistance.

Rate this post