A Texas resident filed an IVC filter perforation lawsuit against Cook Medical, manufacturer of the blood clot prevention device, as well as the physician who implanted the device.

Plaintiff Charles H. had the Cook Celect IVC filter implanted in December 2009.

About two or three weeks later, Charles saw his physician for a follow-up appointment and discussed removing the filter in one year.

“At that time, Dr. [P.] reassured Plaintiff not to worry about the filter, and that removal would not be necessary,” according to the IVC filter perforation lawsuit.

An IVC filter is a medical device designed to filter blood clots that would typically travel from the lower parts of the body to the heart and lungs, potentially causing fatal outcomes such as pulmonary embolism, stroke and heart attack.

Certain individuals are more likely to experience blood clots through their genetic predisposition or for other reasons. The IVC filter is implanted within a patient’s inferior vena cava (IVC) vein.

The IVC is responsible for returning blood to the heart from the lower portion of the body.

Some patients, for one reason or another, are unable to take oral anticoagulant medications in order to prevent blood clots.

These patients, along with others who may be undergoing major surgeries such as hip replacement or knee replacement surgeries, may better benefit from placement of an IVC filter as opposed to taking the oral medications to prevent blood clots.

The Cook IVC filter is designed to be a retrievable filter, or one that is removed once the threat of blood clots has passed.

The device itself has a total of 12 struts that create a small cage.

In Sept. 2015, Charles had an imaging study done to visualize the Cook IVC filter. Charles’ imaging showed that his Cook IVC filter was perforating through his vena cava, aorta and spine, which prompted him to file this IVC filter perforation lawsuit.

According to the lawsuit, “Plaintiff is at risk for future Cook Celect Filter fractures, migrations, perforations, and tilting. He faces numerous health risks, including the risk of death. Plaintiff will require ongoing medical monitoring for the rest of his life.”

Charles has brought forth several counts against Cook Medical and his physician including negligence, strict product liability for failure to warn, defective design and manufacturing defect, breach of express warranty, breach of implied warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose and negligent misrepresentation.

Charles is seeking compensation for the following injuries and damages for both the past and future including pain and suffering, mental anguish, physical impairment and medical expenses. He is also seeking exemplary damages, pre-and post-judgment interest and is demanding a jury trial.

Filing an IVC Filter Perforation Lawsuit

If you or a loved one has experienced severe medical complications following the implantation of an IVC filter, such as organ perforation, filter migration, filter fracture, filtered tilting resulting in failure to prevent blood clots or any other IVC filter side effects, you may be eligible to file an IVC filter lawsuit.

An IVC filter attorney can review your case at no charge and can guide you through your options for taking legal action.

The IVC Filter Perforation Lawsuit is Case No. 4:16-CV-00790, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas.