An Oklahoma man says he developed Bair Hugger infection complications that required several additional surgeries to resolve.

Plaintiff Howard E. says he underwent surgery in March 2012, during which he was kept with a Bair Hugger warming system made by defendants 3M and Arizant.

Howard alleges that following the surgery, he developed Bair Hugger infection complications.

He attributes the infection to contaminants that he says were blown by the Bair Hugger from elsewhere in the operating room towards his open surgical wound.

The contaminants caused him to develop a deep joint infection, he alleges.

Because of that infection, Howard says he ended up undergoing many more surgeries than he had originally planned for.

Treatment for his Bair Hugger infection complications required five subsequent surgeries from March through June 2012, he alleges.

Howard’s Bair Hugger lawsuit raises claims for negligence, failure to warn, defective design and manufacture, breaches of express and implied warranties, negligent and fraudulent misrepresentation, fraudulent concealment, unjust enrichment and violation of Oklahoma state consumer protection laws.

He seeks an award of damages of compensatory and statutory damages, restitution and disgorgement, attorneys’ fees and costs of litigation, all with pre- and post-judgment interest.

Plaintiffs Allege Bair Hugger Infection Complications

Howard’s Bair Hugger lawsuit is one among many others that have been consolidated into a single federal court in Minnesota.

These claims have been brought together in a procedural form known as a multidistrict litigation, or MDL.

According to the master long form complaint for the Bair Hugger MDL, the Bair Hugger system consists of a unit that warms air and blows it through a hose and into a disposable blanket that is applied to a surgical patient’s body.

The warm air exits through the blanket, keeping the patient warm during surgery.

Plaintiffs allege that by disturbing the normal downward air flow that’s usually present in operating rooms, the Bair Hugger picks up contaminants from on or near the floor and carries them up to the surgical site on the patient’s body.

Once there, the plaintiffs say, these contaminants can get inside the surgical wound and later cause Bair Hugger infection complications.

The plaintiffs also take issue with the Bair Hugger’s filtration system. They allege the device’s filter is inadequate to keep pathogens from getting inside the device and thriving there.

Since the device does not have any filter toward the blanket end of the hose, the plaintiffs claim, contaminants from inside the blower can be delivered directly “into the operating theater and onto the surgical site.”

The plaintiffs claim the defendants have known about this problem since at least 2009. Yet instead of adequately warning doctors and patients about the associated risks, plaintiffs claim, the defendants have taken steps to suppress information about those risks.

Howard’s Bair Hugger Lawsuit is part of In re: Bair Hugger Forced Air Warming Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2666, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota.