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

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

IVC Filter Lawsuits

The FDA Recommends That An IVC Filter Stay In Place No Longer Than Two Months

Bard IVC Filter Lawsuits

Lawsuits have brought to light that some doctors never intended to retrieve the filter, and those who did had no training to do so

Friday, November 26, 2021 - It is interesting to note that the FDA has set one or two months as the maximum recommended time until an IVC filter is retrieved. IVC filters should be removed within 60 days, according to the FDA, since the trapped blood clots may cause more blood clots to form, and put the patient's life in danger. The IVC filter was designed to be used only when all other chemical blood thinners had failed and only in the most serious cases of blood clots. IVC filter patients should be presented with a written plan that establishes the date when the device will be retrieved. Most doctors forget about retrieving the IVC filter and assume that the implant will be permanent. IVC filter failure can occur anytime. The longer it is left in, the greater the chances of life-threatening complications. IVC filter patients that experience pain and other complications should consult an IVC filter lawyer to see if they qualify to file a lawsuit against CR Bard Inc., the manufacturer of the ill-conceived medical device. Lawsuits currently filed allege that a design flaw in the IVC filter makes it prone to tilt and fracture allowing pieces to migrate to other parts of the body. More than 10,000 IVC filter lawsuits against manufacturers C.R. Bard, Cook Medical, and Boston Scientific seek lump-sum monetary damages. Plaintiffs with a variety of injuries allege that the device carries inherent design defects. The companies may have failed to warn patients about what they knew or were obligated to know about the medical device's design defects. More than $9 million has been awarded to plaintiffs to compensate for medical expenses, lost wages, and pain and suffering along with other damages.

The inferior vena cava filter (IVC) was not intended to be left in place permanently. Few doctors, however, know how to handle the multiple levels of IVC filter complications that could occur if it is. The most frequent and unexpected complication is that the device may become encapsulated in scar tissue within the IVC wall and be impossible to remove without additional surgery. Doctors use force to retrieve the device stuck to the arterial wall and may break it into pieces that immediately travel with the current of the blood flow and lacerate or penetrate other tissues. Some lawsuits claim IVC filter fragments have embedded themselves in the heart. When IVC filter fractures during retrieval surgery and becomes embedded in another organ, the patient may complain about having severe pain. Even then, surgeons are hesitant to attempt dangerous retrieval surgery. Removal could be difficult because it may be impossible to locate all of the pieces of the filter scattered throughout the body. As a result, the patient must live the rest of their lives worrying that the filter fragment will suddenly dislodge and kill them.

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.