Information about Bard IVC Filter Lawsuits from Lawyers Handling IVC Filter Lawsuits

No-Cost, No-Obligation Bard IVC Filter Lawsuit Review

IVC Filter Lawsuits

Doctors May Be Neglecting IVC Filter Device Patients

Bard IVC Filter Lawsuits

Doctors implanting the IVC Filter into their patients have an ethical responsibility to monitor their patients and to remove the device when it is no longer needed

Tuesday, December 4, 2018 - The Inter Vena Cava Filter (IVC) is a removable device was originally thought to be an innovative medical device designed to stop blood clots from traveling to the heart and lungs causing pulmonary embolism. IVC filters manufactured by CR Bard have malfunctioned, however, and broken apart when a surgeon tries to remove the device to clean or replace it. When even one of the spider-like legs of the IVC breaks away it can travel to other organs of the body, become lodged and lacerate the organ. Since an IVC device is placed into the major artery in between the heart and lungs the first destination for a broken IVC filter spindle is directly into the heart and posing the risk of immediate and sudden death. When a spindly leg gets trapped in an organ the body reflexively goes into spasms in order to expel the foreign object. This causes the broken device, to be driven deeper and deeper into the tissues, much like choking on a chicken bone. As a result of the difficulty in periodically removing IVC filters to clean or replace them intact, the FDA has taken steps to recommend IVC devices be removed and not reinserted. Attorneys handling IVC filter lawsuit claims are offering women a free consultation.

In 2014, the FDA issued an Urgent Field Safety Communication concerning IVC removal safety. Based on adverse event reports to the agency, the FDA issued guidance as to what to do in the event the device migrates intact or fractures and pieces migrate to the heart and lungs and addresses the effects breaking the device while trying to remove it presents. The FDA is most concerned with the lack of follow up and monitoring by physicians of the IVC Filter once the risk of pulmonary embolism has passed. Physicians often leave the device in the patient when it is no longer needed, sometimes permanently. The device then can break apart or migrate into the heart. The FDA recommends that retrievable IVC filter be permanently removed when the risks from pulmonary embolism subside. The FDA is also concerned that the device is being used when ordinary blood thinners would be sufficient to reduce the risk of the blood clotting.

IVC Filters manufactured by CR Bard and others are designed to catch blood clots before they reach the lungs by trapping them. Blood is allowed to flow over the trapped clots with the intention of dissolving them. The IVC filter may protect patients who are at risk of developing a recurrent pulmonary embolism, patients who were treated in the past with blood thinners. Implanting an IVC filter should be considered last resort for patients that are intolerant to blood thinning drugs.

In response to complaints and lawsuits, CR Bard issued the following warning to physicians contemplating the use of the controversial medical device, "Vena cava filters are implanted by physicians only after careful consideration of the risks and benefits of the device in light of each patient's condition. When used as instructed, Bard IVC Filters demonstrate significant benefits to patients and have a safety profile consistent with the medical guidelines published by the American College of Radiology (ACR) and Society of Interventional Radiology (SIR)."

More Recent IVC Filter Lawsuit News:

No-Cost, No-Obligation Bard IVC Filter Lawsuit Case Review for Persons or Families of Persons Who Suffered from Organ Damage, Severe Bleeding, Stroke, or Death

OnderLaw, LLC is a St. Louis personal injury law firm handling serious injury and death claims across the country. Its mission is the pursuit of justice, no matter how complex the case or strenuous the effort. The Onder Law Firm has represented clients throughout the United States in pharmaceutical and medical device litigation such as Pradaxa, Lexapro and Yasmin/Yaz, where the firm's attorneys held significant leadership roles in the litigation, as well as Actos, DePuy, Risperdal and others, and other law firms throughout the nation often seek its experience and expertise on complex litigation.