A recent lawsuit against Cook Medical alleges that the company’s clot filter is defective and poorly designed in a way that led to complications.

Plaintiff Patrick G. says he was implanted with the Gunther Tulip Vena Cava Filter in 2007 by his physician in California. However, the defective design of the clot filter allegedly lead to complications – prompting Patrick to join multidistrict litigation against Cook Medical LLC, Cook Inc., and William Cook Europe ApS.

In some patients, clots have the tendency to form in the deep veins of the legs. These clots can then travel up the vena cava into the lungs where they can cause blockages in the lung’s capillaries. These blockages are known as pulmonary emboli and can be life threatening if left untreated.

IVC filters are devices which are placed in the inferior vena cava to break up clots before the reach the lungs. These devices are typically implanted in patients who are prone to pulmonary emboli and clotting.

The Gunther Tulip Vena Cava Filter is one of these filters. The clot filter has a top hook and four anchoring struts which are intended to secure the device in the blood vessel. On each of its struts, the clot filter has a “flower” formation of wires which gives the device its name. These wires branch out around the device to catch and break up clots flowing through the blood vessel.

However, some patients claim the device is allegedly defective and can lead to a variety of complications. According to the Cook IVC filter lawsuit, the clot filter is defectively designed because it fails to withstand the force exerted by normal blood flow. This failure to withstand normal anatomical functions means that the clot filter can allegedly shift within the blood vessel.

If the IVC filter shifts in the blood vessel, it can allegedly perforate through the wall of the vena cava causing further complications. The defective clot filter can also migrate to other parts of the body, according to the Cook lawsuit, or can fracture into pieces.

All of these complications pose serious health risks. The lawsuit argues that Cook should have warned consumers that their IVC filters may cause a variety of complications. Patrick claims that because the company did not warn him and his doctor, they were allegedly unable to make an informed decision regarding Patrick’s treatment plan.

“Information provided by Cook to the medical community and to consumers concerning the safety and efficacy of its IVC Filters did not accurately reflect the serious and potentially fatal adverse events Plaintiffs could suffer,” the clot filter lawsuit claims.

Patrick accuses the defendants of failure to warn, design defect, negligence, negligence per se, breach of express warranty, breach of implied warranty, and violation of California consumer protection laws. The clot filter lawsuit seeks compensatory damages, punitive damages, disgorgement, restitution, court costs, and attorneys’ fees.

The Clot Filter Lawsuit is Case No. 1:18-cv-03532-TWP-DLP and is part of the IVC Filter MDL, In re: Cook Medical Inc, IVC Filters Marketing, Sales Practices and Products Liability Litigation, Case No. 1:14-ml-2570-RLY-TAB, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana.