A new complainant has alleged vena cava filter problems as a result of being implanted with said device. The plaintiff, Susan B., filed a new lawsuit against Cook Medical Inc. on Oct. 5, 2018 in the U.S. District Court in Indianapolis.

Susan joins numerous other litigants that have filed complaints for vena cava filter problems against the major manufacturer of IVC filters under multidistrict litigation (MDL) 2570—Cook Medical Inc. IVC Filters Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products Liability Litigation.

Susan, a resident of New York, says she experienced vena cava filter problems and sustained injuries while in living in Missouri in 2007.

According to the short-form complaint which accompanies the MDL, Susan was implanted with a Gunther Tulip Vena Cava Filter at St. Luke’s Hospital in Chesterfield, Mo.

In addition to claiming that the defendant has violated Missouri State laws which prohibit deceptive and unfair trade practices and consumer fraud, Susan is holding the Cook Medical Co. liable for their failure to warn of the risks of certain vena cava filter problems, device design defects, negligence and breach of express and implied warranties. She also hopes for assessment of punitive damages against the company.

What is an IVC filter?

Devices like the Gunther Tulip Vena Cava filter are designed to be placed in the inferior vena cava or major vein that runs parallel to the aorta and returns blood to the heart once that blood’s oxygen supply is depleted. They are prescribed for use with people that are at risk for Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT) and Pulmonary Embolism (PE).

Both DVT and PE are related conditions in which a blood clot created in the lower extremities breaks off and travels via the circulatory system to the heart and lung region potentially creating risk factors for cardiac or respiratory arrest or stroke.

Some individuals are prone to produce these blood clots and the first treatment choice would likely be the use of an oral anticoagulant like warfarin. Blood thinners either are not tolerated or are ineffective in a certain percentage of patients, however. These patients have often been given the option of having an umbrella-like apparatus implanted, such as the Gunther Tulip IVC, which can cause vena cava filter problems.

Vena cava filters strain out a traveling blood clot, preventing it from moving to the dangerous territories of the heart, lungs, and brain. When they were initially developed, IVC filters were supposed to be permanent. The first purportedly removable device was approved in 2003 and was followed by several other models.

The newer vena cava filters were marketed for patients that were at short-term risk of blood clots such as victims of trauma. In a certain number of patients with implants, vena cava filter complications showed up such as device disengagement, organ perforation, and associated infection. The filters, whether by Cook Medical or C.R.Bard,  also proved to be more difficult to remove than initially thought.

One significant study of 30,000 enrollees revealed no statistical difference between those implanted with vena cava filters and those without them in terms of outcome.

The Cook IVC Filter Lawsuit is Case No. 1:18-cv-03093-TWP-MJD in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division.