C.R. Bard is facing an IVC Filter lawsuit from a Mississippi man who claims that the device had caused him major health complications.

The inferior vena cava (IVC) filter was implanted to prevent blood clots but had allegedly rotated out of place and perforated his inferior vena cava instead.

The patient opted to have the Bard Eclipse IVC filter implanted, as it was one of the retrievable models from the medical manufacturer.

According to the IVC filter lawsuit, the device had “grossly tilted” after it was implanted that resulted in his inferior vena cava perforation.

Plaintiff Alec C. filed his lawsuit in the U.S. District Court of Northern Mississippi on Dec. 9, 2015, claiming the device had been in a near perpendicular position from when it was first implanted.

The difficult position of the IVC filter has prevented doctors from removing the device and has been presenting prevalent concern to the patient. Alec states that he had the device implanted sometime in September 2010 to stop blood clots forming in either the knees or pelvis and to prevent them from traveling to the heart or lungs.

These small cage-like devices are ultimately used to prevent pulmonary embolism, with permanent and temporary models available for patients to choose from.

Previously, only permanent models were available for patients suffering from potential blood clot complications, but retrievable models have been released and have been steadily gaining popularity.

Unfortunately, the retrievable models are reportedly not as well made as permanent IVC filters, allegedly breaking apart or perforating the inferior vena cava.

Overview of IVC Filter Allegations

Other IVC filter complications reported include: the device moving out of position, puncturing a vein, and pieces of the device traveling to the heart, lungs or other areas of the body.

According to Alec’s lawsuit, the IVC filter was so badly out of position that two of the legs were leaning against the anterior and posterior wall of the abdominal aorta.

The positioning of the device made it too dangerous for medical experts to remove, which could cause the IVC filter to fracture and cause an embolism. Alec’s lawsuit points out that several studies have questioned the safety and effectiveness of all IVC filter models, including temporary models made by Bard.

His claim also points out that these studies are being conducted years after these devices were released, and long before Bard performed any inquiries into their own IVC filters.

According to a recent study published in the October 2015 issue of Annals of Surgery, the article highlighted the adverse effects of IVC filters and indicated that they were not effective in preventing pulmonary embolisms and actually caused thrombosis to occur.

Alec’s case is joining a number of other IVC filter lawsuits, alleging similar injuries allegedly caused by Bard filters. These IVC filter lawsuits have been consolidated into a multidistrict litigation (MDL) in the U.S. District of Arizona under U.S. District Judge David G. Campbell.

Each of these claims allege that the IVC filters were defectively designed and were unreasonably dangerous. Legal experts ultimately expect Bard to face hundreds, if not thousands of IVC filter lawsuits.

The Bard IVC Filter Lawsuit is Case No: 1:15-cv-00208-SA-DAS in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi.