An IVC filter lawsuit has been filed by an Alabama women over claims that the surgically implanted medical device caused life-threatening injuries.

Plaintiff Jessica P. claims that IVC filter manufacturer C.R. Bard Inc. negligently misrepresented that its G2 filter was a safe and effective way to treat blood clots by aggressively marketing the product to the medical community, as well as to the general public.

Jessica alleges that Bard knew that the medical implant had a high failure rate, which could lead to potentially fatal complications. However, instead of warning patients, the manufacturer fraudulently concealed the information.

According to the IVC filter lawsuit, Jessica was implanted with a G2 filter to prevent DVT/PE development in relation to a gastric bypass surgery in 2006. By 2013, the plaintiff claims to have experienced shortness of breath, tightness in her chest, and pain in her lower back and abdomen.

An imaging study confirmed that the IVC filter had migrated and four of the metal legs had perforated her vena cava wall. Jessica then underwent another surgery in order to have the G2 filter removed.

The IVC filter lawsuit alleges that Bard failed to conduct any clinical testing of their G2 medical device to determine if it would function properly as a permanent implant in the human body.

The plaintiff claims that the IVC filter manufacturer knew that device failure would expose patients to serious injuries including hemorrhages, organ perforation, heart attacks, and even death. She is seeking $75,000 for the severe injuries allegedly caused by the IVC filter implant.

IVC Filter Complications

Inferior vena cava (IVC) filters are a small cage-like device that is surgically implanted into the main vein in order to trap blood clots and hold them there until they dissolve. The medical implant is an alternative option for patients who are unable to take an anticoagulant but need something in order to prevent pulmonary embolism (PE).

The FDA has approved IVC filter implantation for the following circumstances:

• Anticoagulant therapy fails to work in thromboembolic diseases
• Treating pulmonary thromboembolism when blood thinners shouldn’t be used
• Recurring pulmonary embolism when anticoagulant use has failed
• Emergency treatment following massive pulmonary embolism when expected benefits of traditional therapy are reduced

However, the federal agency has received hundreds of severe adverse event reports that the IVC filter causes serious health risks due to long-term placement.

According to the FDA, IVC filters should be removed as soon as the risk of blood clots has subsided. The agency encourages physicians to remove IVC filters between 29 and 54 days in order to avoid serious complications.

IVC Filter Lawsuits

IVC filter lawsuits continue to be filed across the U.S. by plaintiffs who claim the device caused serious injuries including organ perforation, cardiac arrhythmia, perforations of tissues, heart attacks, and even death.

Some plaintiffs claim that the IVC filter perforated the vena cava and then traveled to nearby organs including the bowels, aorta, and liver. Contact an IVC filter attorney to find out if you have legal claim.

The IVC Filter Lawsuit is Case No. 2:15-cv-01739-DGC, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, Northeastern Division.