A blood clot filter side effects lawsuit has been filed recently by a group of Missouri plaintiffs who claim that Bard manufactured defective IVC filters and that they suffered injuries as a result.

Eight plaintiffs are bringing a blood clot filter side effects lawsuit against C.R. Bard Inc. stating that they each suffered personal injury damages as a direct result of implantation of an Inferior Vena Cava (IVC) filter medical device that was manufactured by Bard.

The filters in question are the Recovery, G2, G2X, G2Express, Eclipse, Meridian and Denali filters. This also includes Bard’s Recovery Cone Removal System.

All of the claims in this blood clot filter side effects lawsuit relate to the design, manufacture, sale, testing, marketing, labeling, advertising, promotion and distribution of the Bard filters.

What is an IVC Filter?

First made available in the 1960s, inferior vena cava filters are devices that are designed to catch blood clots that travel from the lower portions of the body to the heart or lungs. Originally, IVC filters were designed to be permanent.

The inferior vena cava is a large vein that returns blood to the heart from the lower part of the body. Sometimes, people develop blood clots and these clots can travel through the inferior vena cava to the lungs.

When clots develop in the legs, this condition is called deep vein thrombosis. If the clots travel to the lungs, they are called pulmonary emboli.

A pulmonary embolism is a serious and life threatening condition.

People who are risk for these conditions sometimes opt for a blood thinning medication to combat clots, however, sometimes a blood clot filter is viable option.

A small, cage-like device, the IVC filter, is implanted in the inferior vena cava. The device is designed to catch any clots before they can travel too far. The clots then dissolve over time.

They can be designed to be permanent, but more recently the FDA has issued a warning that IVC filters are a temporary fix and should be removed as soon as the patient is no longer at risk for pulmonary emboli.

The FDA warned that certain complications are associated with long term use.

The FDA lists the following IVC filter side effects as complications:

• IVC thrombosis
• Deep vein thrombosis (DVT)
• Access site thrombosis
• Filter migration
• Caval penetration
• IVC filter fracture

Blood Clot Filter Side Effects Lawsuit

The plaintiffs in the blood clot filter side effects lawsuit claim that Bard sought to expand the market for their IVC filters by targeting nontraditional patient populations.

They claim that because Bard targeted bariatric, trauma, cancer and orthopedic patients who were only temporarily at risk, Bard tripled its sales.

Also, because physicians were eager to remove the devices once the risks subsided for their patients, Bard produced a retrievable device and sold it to physicians. Allegedly, Bard received clearance for their new device without adequate testimony on the safety of it.

Many of the plaintiffs in this blood clot filter side effects lawsuit suffered failed removals and ongoing injuries as a result of Bard’s devices.

They bring claims of defective manufacturing, design defect, defect due to inadequate warning, negligence, failure to recall, failure to warn, breaches of express and implied warranty and negligent representation and fraud among others.

If you or a loved one suffered IVC filter side effects such as migration, IVC perforation, DVT or pulmonary embolism, you may have a legal claim. An IVC filter lawsuit may help you obtain compensation for your medical bills, pain and suffering, lost wages and more. Submit your information now for a FREE case evaluation.

The Blood Clot Filter Side Effects Lawsuit is Case No 4:16-cv-01116 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri.