Medical manufacturing giant Cook Group Inc. is facing a new IVC filter lawsuit, jointly filed by three different patients who allegedly suffered injuries from their devices.

Each of the individuals allegedly suffered IVC filter complications soon after having the devices implanted, and they claim that due to the defective nature of the retrievable IVC filters they each experienced problems.

The plaintiffs involved in this lawsuit are: Texas plaintiff Donald S., New Jersey plaintiff Marilee S., and Missouri plaintiff David H.

Each of the plaintiffs allege they suffered permanent injuries and impairments in direct result of the IVC filter complications.

IVC (Inferior Vena Cava) filters are small metal cage like devices that are directly implanted in the inferior vena cava, the largest vein in the body, to trap and prevent blood clots.

These blood clots will often form in either the pelvis or legs and then travel to the heart or lungs, leading to blood clot complications.

These devices are designed to trap blood clots, after which the clots resolve themselves before causing any damage to the body. Patients who are at high risk for thrombotic events are often prescribed these devices.

The patients and physicians together can choose between permanent or retrievable models.

IVC Filter Lawsuit

According to the IVC filter lawsuit, each of the Cook devices were temporary models and allegedly caused the claimants to suffer various IVC filter side effects. Each of the plaintiffs had the Cook IVC filters implanted to prevent blood clots and had used the devices for their intended purposes, according to court documents.

Even though Cook advertised their IVC filters as safe and effective devices, the plaintiffs claim they still suffered IVC filter complications.

The events the plaintiffs allegedly suffered have been similar to other reports of IVC filter side effects including device migration, breaking and tilting out of the implantation site.

Overview of IVC Filter Side Effects

Between the years 2005 and 2010, the FDA received over 921 IVC filter adverse event reports, spurring the agency to send out a public warning in August 2010.

Then in 2014, the agency updated its warning to state that many of the IVC filter side effects occur from the retrievable models.

The retrievable models were allegedly manufactured to be of lesser quality than the permanent models, causing the devices to break apart or migrate out of place. Furthermore, the agency warned that the retrievable IVC filters should be removed soon after the blood clots are resolved.

According to the IVC filter lawsuit, neither Donald nor the other plaintiffs were aware of the dangers surrounding the retrievable models. Cook allegedly failed to contact them or their respective physicians, nor did they provide any relevant studies.

Furthermore their IVC filter lawsuit alleges the company knew the severity of the risks, but failed to disclose it to protect their product’s market value.

Each of the plaintiffs state they never would have used the devices, if they had known the risks of IVC filter complications.

This IVC filter lawsuit is Case No. 1622-CC01239, in the Missouri Circuit Court Twenty-Second Judicial Circuit (City of St. Louis).