C.R. Bard and other inferior vena cava (IVC) filter manufacturers are facing growing public scrutiny for complications reported in conjunction with these blood clot filters, with many patients opting to file their own IVC filter lawsuit. Patients can file their own IVC filter lawsuit to seek compensatory damages.

In order to be eligible to file an IVC filter lawsuit, patients must have had an IVC filter implanted for blood clot prevention. Patients may qualify even if they did not experience IVC filter complications.

IVC filters are small metal cage-like devices that directly implanted in the body’s vena cava, the largest vein in the human body. The vena cava is a vital part of the body’s circulation, with IVC filters providing a safe alternative for patients who cannot be prescribed anticoagulant treatment.

IVC filters work by blocking and preventing blood clots that form in the legs and pelvis, from traveling to the heart and lungs. This ultimately prevents the onset of blood clot attacks and thereby increases the longevity of the patient’s life. When IVC filters were originally released, they were meant only for permanent placement, but manufacturers have recently developed and released retrievable models meant for temporary implantation.

However, numerous patients have alleged retrievable models are made from inferior components and are prone to breaking apart inside the patient.

Overview of IVC Filter Complications

Oftentimes patients have to undergo revision surgery to explant the device, but this may not be an option for other patients due to the sensitive nature of where the device components migrated to. According to IVC filter lawsuit allegations, injuries listed in these product liability claims include, but are not limited to,:

• Internal Organs, Veins, or Arteries being Punctured
• Fractures or Broken IVC Filter Components
• Perforation or Migration of IVC Filter
• Explant Removal Difficulties
• Injury to Heart, Lungs, or other Organs
• Wrongful Death

The FDA warned against potential IVC filter complications in 2010, stating receipt of 921 injury reports since 2005. More specifically, the FDA had received 328 reports of IVC filter migration, 146 reports of IVC filter component detachment, 70 reports of IVC filter perforation, and 56 reports of IVC filter fracture.

The agency stated that the likelihood of IVC filter complications is greater if the device is left in the patient for long periods of time. The FDA released a later warning in May 2014, stating patients should get the IVC filter removed generally within 29 to 54 days after implantation.

Even with these warnings, numerous patients have sustained serious injury from IVC filter complications and have resorted to filing legal action. An IVC filter lawsuit can be a route to compensation for pain and suffering, medical bills, and lost earnings.

When determining the number of compensatory damages a patient can claim, attorneys look at the following factors in the IVC filter lawsuit:

• How long the IVC filter injury lasted
• How the IVC filter complications impact the patient’s physical and emotional health
• Pain and Suffering
• Future Medical Expenses
• Any Lost Wages or Loss of Earning Capacity
• Whether or not there was Wrongful Death