The recipient of a Bard IVC filter is suing the manufacturer, holding it responsible for her ensuing IVC filter complications.

Plaintiff Amber N. says she was implanted with a Bard Eclipse IVC filter in October 2012. By January 2014, her physicians discovered the IVC filter had imbedded itself into her internal organs.

Her doctors attempted IVC filter removal surgery, but they found the complications had made IVC filter removal impossible.

Amber says her IVC filter remains insider her body to this day. She had to undergo extensive medical treatment following the device’s failure, she alleges, and she says she is at risk for developing further IVC filter complications that could require even more medical and surgical procedures.

Amber argues that these complications are the result of defective design on the part of the device’s manufacturer. She is now bringing an IVC filter lawsuit against C.R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral Vascular Inc., who she says are responsible for the design, manufacture, marketing and distribution of her IVC filter.

Amber’s IVC filter lawsuit raises claims based on theories of fraud, negligence, misrepresentation, defective manufacturing, defective design, failure to warn, failure to recall, breach of warranty, and violation of South Dakota consumer protection laws.

In addition to compensatory damages, Amber is seeking an award of punitive damages to discourage future similar actions by the defendants. She is also asking for reimbursement for her attorneys’ fees and costs of litigation.

What Is An IVC Filter?

An IVC filter, or inferior vena cava filter, is a device used to prevent clot-related maladies like pulmonary embolism in patients who are at risk for those conditions but for whom anticoagulant medication is not a good option.

The filter consists of a basket-like frame made of metal wire. IVC filters are made to be placed in the inferior vena cava, the major blood vessel that returns blood to the heart.

When functioning properly, an IVC filter traps free-floating blood clots in the inferior vena cava, preventing them from advancing to the heart or lungs where they might cause pulmonary embolism. The device holds the clot in place while naturally occurring anticoagulants in the blood dissolve it.

IVC Filter Complications

Unfortunately, these filters have been associated with a host of damaging complications. Amber’s lawsuit says that shortly after an older Bard IVC filter hit the market, the company began receiving reports of IVC filter complications.

According to these reports, some filters fractured, migrated out of position, or perforated the blood vessel they were placed in. Filter fracture can let loose metal parts in the bloodstream that may migrate to the heart and put the patient at risk for perforation of the heart, myocardial infarction, or possibly death, Amber alleges.

Some IVC filters are designed to be removable after the risk of pulmonary embolism has resolved. But as in Amber’s case, complications can make IVC filter removal impossible, and the patient must live with a failed filter inside their body.

This IVC filter lawsuit is Case No. 16-cv-4005 in the U.S. District Court for the District of South Dakota.