A man from Colorado recently filed an inferior vena cava filter lawsuit, alleging he developed serious device complications. This inferior vena cava filter lawsuit is joining a growing multidistrict litigation (MDL), where it will stand alongside other claims alleging similar inferior vena cava (IVC) filter complications.

Plaintiff Felix H. opted to file this inferior vena cava filter lawsuit after discovering manufacturer Cook Medical Inc. either knew or should have known about the device’s allegedly defective nature.

According to the inferior vena cava filter lawsuit, Felix had the device implanted for typical treatment purposes and had no reason to be wary of potential device complications that could compound his medical condition. IVC filters are small metal cage like devices, which are directly implanted in the inferior vena cava.

The vena cava is the largest vein in the human body, and is a vital component of the circulation system. IVC filters are implanted into the vein, to stop and resolve blood clots forming in the legs or pelvis. By stopping the blood clots from traveling to either the heart or lungs, the IVC filters ultimately prevent potentially fatal blood clot attacks.

IVC filters are often prescribed to patients who are at risk for blood clot attacks but who cannot be prescribed anticoagulant treatment. Cook Medical had reportedly advertised their IVC filter to be safe and effective for patient use, which was reviewed by Felix’s physician.

With these benefits in mind, Felix reportedly underwent an implant procedure on Sept. 2, 2005. However not long after, Felix allegedly developed serious side effects associated with defective IVC filters.

Overview of IVC Filter Complications

Defective IVC filters are a primary concern of the medical community and patient population, with the FDA stating the devices should be removed not long after the blood clots are resolved.

The FDA first warned against IVC filter complications in 2010, with the agency stating it had revised 921 injury reports since 2005 including:

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

The FDA further stated that IVC filter complications were more likely in patients using the device on a long term basis, and that IVC filter should be removed after the blood clot issue is resolved. The FDA also advised that physicians consider the risks and benefits of IVC filter removal for the patient, before prescribing them.

The FDA issued an updated warning in May 2014, stating that a retrievable IVC filter should generally be removed between 29 and 54 days after implantation. Even though these IVC filter complications can be devastating to patients, Cook Medical allegedly failed to warn the public against these possibilities.

Felix’s inferior vena cava lawsuit is being filed in MDL No. 2570, where it will be streamlined through the litigation process. By joining an MDL, Felix’s claim will avoid potential problems like conflicting rulings from different judges.

Felix’s inferior vena cava lawsuit is seeking multiple counts of damages, including negligence and failure to warn.

This Vena Cava Filter Lawsuit is Case No. 1:18-cv-01222-RLY-TAB, in the U.S. District Court of Southern Indiana, Indianapolis Division.