A New York woman has added her own Bard IVC filter lawsuit to a product liability multidistrict litigation in Arizona.

Plaintiff Barbara P. says that in September 2011 she was implanted with an Eclipse IVC filter manufactured by defendant C.R. Bard.

By reference to the multidistrict litigation’s master long form complaint, she alleges she suffered IVC filter complications that exceeded what she was led to expect from the product information provided by Bard. Had she been more adequately warned, she never would have agreed to be implanted with an Eclipse filter, Barbara states in her Bard IVC filter lawsuit.

Bard IVC Filter Lawsuit Joins MDL

Barbara has filed her Bard IVC filter lawsuit as part of a multidistrict litigation, or MDL, that’s now pending in a federal court in Arizona. This MDL is a collection of individual legal claims brought by patients like Barbara who say they suffered damaging and potentially dangerous complications after being implanted with a Bard IVC filter.

The federal court system sometimes creates an MDL when it expects a large number of similar claims against the same defendant. An MDL puts these claims all under the supervision of a single federal judge so that pretrial procedures may be conducted more efficiently.

An IVC filter is an implantable medical device used to prevent blood clot-related injuries like stroke and pulmonary embolism. These devices are an alternative to anticoagulant medication for patients who are at particular risk for these conditions.

The filter is a small, basket-like device that gets positioned inside the inferior vena cava, the vein that returns blood to the heart and lungs. From that position, the filter captures clots and holds them in place while natural anticoagulants in the blood dissolve them.

According to the plaintiffs in several IVC filter lawsuits, these devices don’t always work like they were intended to – and when they fail, the results can be dangerous and sometimes deadly.

These filters have been known to come apart, fracture, or migrate out of position. Loose fragments and entire filters may migrate through the bloodstream, sometimes finding their way inside the heart.

The plaintiffs challenge the way Bard handled information about these IVC filter complications. They allege the company failed to provide patients and doctors with adequate warnings that would give them an accurate idea of the risks involved in IVC filter implantation. They accuse the company of over-promoting the device while suppressing information about the associated risks.

Several other Bard products are at issue in the Bard MDL besides the Eclipse filter that Barbara was implanted with. These other devices include but are not limited to the Recovery, G2, G2 Express, G2 X, Meridian, and Denali IVC filters.

Other filter manufacturers are also facing product liability claims implicating their own products. An MDL in an Indiana federal court is hosting claims over IVC filters made by Cook Medical. Claims over filters manufactured by Boston Scientific have also been filed, but those claims have yet to be consolidated into an MDL.

Barbara’s Bard IVC Filter Lawsuit is Case No. 2:17-cv-00405 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona. It’s part of the Bard IVC Filter MDL, MDL No. 2641, also in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona.