C.R. Bard is facing a new IVC filter lawsuit from a Wisconsin man alleging serious post-implant side effects. The man had the Bard G2 Inferior Vena Cava (IVC) filter implanted, and allegedly experienced Bard IVC filter complications soon after.

Plaintiff Richard S. had the G2 IVC filter implanted on Nov. 12, 2008, after his physician recommended the device to prevent blood clots traveling to his lungs. Use of an IVC filter can prevent fatal pulmonary embolism and other blood clot injuries.

However, Richard suffered Bard IVC filter complications, and he now brings this legal action against the company for allegedly failing to warn him about these problems.

Overview of Bard IVC Filter Complications

The G2 IVC filter is a second generation IVC filter. It was approved in 2005 and meant to be a replacement for the company’s first generation Recovery IVC Filter. However, critics say there were no significant design changes between the IVC filter models, and both models were pulled off the market without any official recalls.

Similar to the Recovery, the G2 did not go through vigorous clinical trials because Bard claims the device was “equivalent” to other filters already released on the market. But studies indicate the IVC filter models fracture in 38% of patients within five years of getting the device implanted and has the highest risk of any IVC filter.

C.R. Bard had sold approximately 160,000 G2 IVC filter from 2005 to 2010. Following those sales, hundreds of reports of Bard IVC filter complications were reported, some of which were blamed for the patient’s death. In 2010, C.R. Bard pulled the G2 filter off the market, after a study warned against “high rates of fracture and embolization” and other life threatening IVC filter complications.

The FDA had issued a public warning against IVC filter complications in 2010, stating it had received 921 injury reports since 2005. The FDA stated it had received:

• 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

The FDA warned the public that IVC filter complications were more likely to occur in long-term use, and that retrievable filters should be removed after the risk of blood clot has passed. The FDA encouraged healthcare providers to consider the risks and benefits before recommending the device to patients.

The FDA had released an updated warning in May 2014 stating after the risk of blood clots subsides the IVC filter should be removed. This should occur between 29 and 54 days after implantation, otherwise the risk of Bard IVC filter complications could have potentially fatal consequences for patients.

Richard is bringing 14 counts of product liability for manufacturing a defective device, failed to warn against Bard IVC filter complications, and other negligence claims. C.R. Bard is current facing about 1,700 other IVC filter lawsuits from across the country, which have been centralized in multidistrict litigation (MDL) No. 2641.

This IVC filter lawsuit was filed on April 18, 2017, and is awaiting further legal action. The IVC Filter Lawsuit is Case No. 2: 17-cv-01152-DGC, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona.