C.R. Bard is facing a growing multidistrict litigation (MDL) consisting of product liability claims, which were filed by patients who suffered serious side effects of IVC Filter products. One of the most recent IVC filter lawsuits was filed by a man from Missouri, alleging he experienced side effects of IVC filter use soon after implantation.

Plaintiff Kevin D. opted to file legal action against C.R. Bard, after discovering the company either knew or should have known about the potential side effects of IVC filter use. According to the IVC filter lawsuit, Kevin had the G2 Vena Cava filter implanted for typical treatment purposes on May 20, 2009.

Kevin reportedly opted for the G2 Vena Cava filter after he and his physician reviewed the marketing materials and product information provided by C.R. Bard, which promised the device to be a safe and reliable treatment method for blood clots.

IVC (inferior vena cava) filters are small metal cage-like devices, which are directly implanted into the inferior vena cava. This is the largest vein in the human body and is a vital component of the circulation system.

IVC filters can be good treatment choices for patients who cannot be prescribed anticoagulant treatment because they can resolve blood clot risks without inhibiting the body’s clotting mechanism. IVC filters work by trapping blood clots forming in the legs or pelvis, and preventing them from traveling to the heart or lungs.

This ultimately prevents potentially fatal blood clot complications, with the FDA recommending removal of the device soon after the risk is resolved. However, a number of patients have reportedly experienced adverse side effects of IVC filter use, which compounded the health of many patients.

Kevin was reportedly one of these patients, who has since been contending with the long-term side effects of IVC filter use. According to the IVC filter lawsuit CT scans taken on March 02, 2018, which showed that the G2 Vena Cava filter had perforated the inferior vena cava.

Kevin opted to file legal action against C.R. Bard, after discovering numerous other patients had suffered injuries from IVC filters.

Overview of IVC Filter Complications

The FDA first warned against the side effects of IVC filter use in 2010, with the agency received 921 injury reports since 2005 including incidents of:

• 328 reports of IVC Filter Migration
• 146 reports of IVC Filter Component Detachment
• 70 reports of IVC Filter Perforation
• 56 reports of IVC Filter Fracture

In addition to the injury reports, the FDA stated that most of these side effects of IVC filter use had been patients who had the devices implanted for long term periods. The FDA released a later warning in March 2014, with the agency stating that the IVC filter should be removed between 29 and 53 days after implantation.

Even though these complications can be devastating to patients’ health, C.R. Bard allegedly failed to warn against potential side effects of IVC filter use. Kevin stated he would not have agreed to have the G2 Vena Cava filter implanted if he knew the risk for potential complications.

This IVC filter lawsuit is joining MDL No. 2641, where it will stand alongside other claims alleging similar side effects of IVC filter use.

This Side Effects of IVC Filter Lawsuit is Case No. 2:18-cv-02114-DGC, in the U.S. District Court of Arizona.