Houston Car Accident Lawyers
A Bard IVC filter lawsuit was filed against the company after a Florida resident implanted with the G2® Vena Cava Filter allegedly suffered injuries. This plaintiff has joined the master complaint against Bard.
Plaintiff Shelly S. was implanted with Bard’s G2® Vena Cava filter in 2008. According to the complaint, the patient and doctors were unaware of the potential for severe side effects caused by Bard’s G2 filters, including:
- Cardiac/pericardial tamponade (pressure caused by a collection of blood in the area around the heart)
- Cardiac arrhythmia and other symptoms similar to myocardial infarction
- Severe and persistent pain
- Perforations of tissue, vessels and organs
The plaintiff alleges that Bard obtained clearance from the Food and Drug Administration in 2003 to sell removable IVC filters to doctors and patients; however, that initial clearance was “obtained despite lack of adequate testimony on the safety and efficacy of the new line of devices.”
“Bard’s retrievable IVC filters have been plagued with problems – all created by Bard itself – most notably, the absence of any evidence that the products were effective in preventing pulmonary embolism (the very condition the product was indicated to prevent),” states the Bard IVC filter lawsuit.
The Bard IVC filter lawsuit alleges that C.R. Bard Inc. was aware of these potential side effects, but negligently misrepresented various types of IVC filters it manufactured as safe.
“Bard represents the fracture rate of the G2® filter to be 1.2%. Based upon a review of the data available in the public domain (including the FDA MAUDE database statistics and the published medical literature), this representation does not accurately reflect the true frequency of fractures for the G2® filter,” states the complaint.
The plaintiff alleges that Bard hid problems with various models of its filters over the years. One Bard executive even questioned why new IVC filters were being developed if the previous version supposedly had no problems, according to the Bard IVC filter lawsuit. Bard downplayed problems with its previous IVC filters, even as it attempted to introduce new IVC filters onto the market.
FDA Complaints about IVC Filters
The Food and Drug Administration issued a warning in 2010 in response to patient complaints about IVC filters. The agency noted that removable IVC filters, like the ones at issue in the Bard IVC filter lawsuit, are meant to be temporary and should be removed within 54 days of implantation. Failure to remove the filters can lead to serious health implications and even death.
Anyone with an IVC filter experiencing chest pain or shortness of breath should get medical assistance immediately. Patients who have experienced serious medical issues after being implanted with an IVC filter should consider contacting an experienced attorney.
If you’ve experienced pain and suffering due to a defective IVC filter, you may be able to seek compensation by filing a Bard IVC filter lawsuit. Call the attorneys at McDonald Worley today for a free case evaluation.