A recent study on retrievable inferior vena cava (IVC) filters suggests that these medical devices can, in most cases, be removed from their patients with minimal complications, or even none at all.

While many people have recently become highly concerned with the potential risk of IVC filter complications, this study helps to assuage these fears.

However, the study does suggest that IVC filter complications are not unheard of, and may be more likely to occur when the IVC filter devices are left in place for longer periods of time.

IVC filters are implanted in a patient to prevent blood clots from being able to travel into the heart and lungs. This helps to prevent serious conditions such as pulmonary embolism. Patients who are at risk for pulmonary embolism, but cannot take an anticoagulant, are often implanted with an IVC filter.

A recent study found that hospital doctors at the University of Toledo Medical Center were able to successfully remove IVC filters in 95 percent of IVC filter removal procedures.

The researchers studied completed data records from 258 different IVC filter patients, recorded between July 2007 and August 2011. Over 37 percent of these patients had permanent, non-retrievable IVC filters implanted. For another 15.5 percent, retrievable IVC filters were converted into permanent IVC filters.

The study showed that doctors attempted to remove these filters from 73 of these patients, and successfully removed 69, or 94.5 percent. The study indicated that, for those filters that could not be removed, this was because the IVC filter had shifted out of the correct position. Ten percent of the patients died.

These new findings suggest that serious complications and even death are more likely to occur the longer an IVC filter has been implanted, and federal regulators have responded by warning doctors about the extreme importance of removing the IVC filter devices on schedule, as soon as the patient’s risk for blood clots has passed.

IVC Filter Lawsuits

Hundreds of adverse event reports discrediting the effectiveness and safety of IVC filters have emerged in recent years. These reports often claim that the medical devices moved out of position and even punctured the vena cava. In some cases, patients reported that their IVC filter fractured, which allowed miniscule pieces of the device to travel into the heart or lungs.

Some patients have chosen to respond to these alleged complications by filing IVC filter lawsuits. These lawsuits allege that the manufacturers of IVC filter devices failed to adequately.

IVC filter lawsuits also allege that the manufacturers sold dangerous and defective devices that caused serious medical, emotional, and financial harm.

These individuals who have suffered from IVC filter complications are pursuing IVC filter lawsuits against major companies such as Bard and Cook. Bard IVC filter lawsuits and Cook IVC filter lawsuits have each been centralized before single judges.

If you or someone you know has suffered from IVC filter complications, you may be able to file an IVC filter lawsuit against the manufacturer, or join an IVC filter multidistrict litigation (MDL) against Bard or Cook.