A surgical retrieval that failed prompted an Option Elite IVC filter lawsuit. The medical device that was intended to capture blood clots for those patients who faced a high risk of pulmonary embolism allegedly shifted out of position and got embedded in an Ohio man’s vena cava.
The IVC filter lawsuit was recently filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, arguing that manufacturers of the IVC filter are responsible. IVC filters have been sold by several different manufacturers and have been linked to more consumer and doctor complaints in recent years.
An Option Elite retrievable IVC filter was implanted in the patient in the beginning of 2014. When filter retrieval was tried approximately 18 months later, the IVC filter had moved inside of the patient’s body and the hook of the device had become implanted in the inferior vena cava.
According to the IVC filter lawsuit, significant injuries were sustained due to the fact that the filter was essentially irretrievable.
The patient says he continues to face high risks such as blood clots and the disruption of normal flow from the blood to the lungs and the heart.
An ongoing risk of perforation from the IVC filter is another side effect the patient names in his lawsuit. If the IVC filter breaks apart and migrates to other portions of the body such as the lungs or the heart, this could lead to fatal injuries.
This IVC filter lawsuit is one of thousands that have been filed against multiple manufacturers when the devices didn’t work as intended. Many patients came forward with claims of pain and then struggled to have the devices removed due to breakdown or adhesion.
Dangers of IVC Filters
These devices were intended to be retrievable once a blood clot risk had decreased, however, many of these manufacturers are facing lawsuits due to complaints associated with their products including claims that the filter fractured or punctured the vein, ultimately sending pieces to the lungs or the heart, or that the device moved out of position and put patients at risk for severe side effects.
IVC filter problems initially emerged onto the marketplace approximately a decade ago and the FDA first warned about IVC filter issues in August 2010 after they received nearly 1,000 adverse event reports from patients who had been negatively affected.
In 2014, the FDA issued a follow up warning requesting that physicians remove IVC filters no later than a few months after an individual was no longer facing a risk of pulmonary embolism.
However, many of the retrieval procedures have been unsuccessful or complicated by the fact that the devices have broken down or have tilted inside the body.
If you’ve suffered serious injuries due to an IVC filter, you may have grounds to pursue a lawsuit with the help of an experienced lawyer. Contact the team at McDonald Worley today for a free case review.