IVC filter failure has been reported across the country. Patients and doctors report the retrievable models of these blood clot filters are prone to breaking apart and complicating their medical conditions.

Even though these medical devices are meant to ease blood clot conditions, reports of device embolization and device fracture have led the FDA and other medical authorities to warn patients and doctors about them.

The public became widely aware of IVC filter failure in 2010, when the FDA issued a public warning regarding the association between these complications and retrievable IVC filter models. From 2005 to 2010, the FDA had reportedly received 921 injury reports indicating IVC (inferior vena cava) filter failure, including the following incidents:

• 328 reports of IVC filter migration
• 146 reports of IVC filter component detachment
• 70 reports of IVC filter perforation of inferior vena cava
• 56 reports of IVC filter fracture

The FDA stressed the importance of not using retrievable filters for long-term medical treatment, and that these devices should be removed as soon as the risk of blood clots has resolved.

In addition, the FDA reminded the medical community these IVC filters are only meant for temporary placement and leaving them in longer than necessary could potentially compound the patient’s condition. The FDA released an updated warning in May 2014, stating that these devices should be removed between 29 and 54 days after the IVC filter is implanted.

Overview of IVC Filter Failure Complications

IVC filters are small metal cage-like devices that are directly implanted into the body’s inferior vena cava. As the largest vein in the human body, the inferior vena cava is a primary component of the body’s circulation process.

IVC filters are implanted in the vein to prevent blood clot injuries from occurring by trapping and having the blood clot resolve itself. Blood clots that form in the legs or pelvis can travel up to the lungs or heart. IVC filters prevent that migration by stopping the blood clot near its formation spot.

IVC filters are often prescribed to patients who cannot be prescribed anticoagulant drugs. Some filter models are designed to be permanent, and others are made to be retrievable after the risk of blood clot has subsided.

Howeve,r the problems with IVC filter failure are largely associated with the retrievable models, with many allegations claiming the devices are defectively made with inferior components. As mentioned above, the complications associated with IVC filter failure are:

• Device Migration: The IVC filter moves out of position. This is the most commonly reported IVC filter complication.
• Device Fracture: The IVC filter breaks while in position inside the inferior vena cava.
• Detachment of Device Components (Embolization): The IVC filter components detach and become loose in the bloodstream.
• Device Perforation: The IVC filter components perforate the inferior vena cava wall, and occasionally nearby organs.

Even though IVC filter failure can be potentially fatal, manufacturing companies allegedly failed to correctly warn the public against these dangers, according to some patients. Patients who experienced IVC filter failure may be able to file legal action against these manufacturing companies.