Houston Car Accident Lawyers

Home » Medical Device Injury » Number of IVC Filter Lawsuits Growing Against Manufacturers

A new IVC filter lawsuit argues that using these medical devices puts patients at risk for severe injuries. Cordis is one of three biggest manufacturers of IVC filters currently facing litigation from injured patients who argue they were never told about the serious side effects. IVC filter lawsuits maintain that patients and medical professionals were never fully warned about the significant risks associated with side effects.

Multiple lawsuits have recently been lodged against the medical device manufacturer Cordis Corporation based in Miami. IVC filter lawsuits argue that the faulty vascular filters may cause injury and death. There are lawsuits lodged against this one manufacturer in California and several within Florida as well.

Claims in many of these IVC filter lawsuits include allegations that the filters broke down and migrated to the other areas of the body, caused significant organ problems, and punctured veins. Other IVC filter manufacturers including Bard Medical Division and Cook Medical face nearly 6,000 IVC filter lawsuits in court.

Many of these have been consolidated into multidistrict litigation. The most recent IVC filter lawsuits in Florida argue that the TrapEase Vena Cava Filter, which was designed to protect the lungs and heart from fatal blood clots breaks down and endangers patients even further. Disintegration, migration and fracture have been named in numerous consumer and patient complaints.

xarelto bleeding death lawsuit filedThe IVC filter lawsuits allege that Cordis is responsible for deceptive marketing, failure to warn about the risks of the product, and defective manufacture and design.

One 68-year-old plaintiff in an IVC filter lawsuit received his implant in October of 2012.

In March 2016, however, he died from thrombosis after complaining of severe pain in his back and light headedness.

An autopsy noted that rupture and vena cava dissection both affected that patient.

Many of these legal claims argue that IVC filters, designed to be retrievable, were faulty and fractured, migrated, and punctured veins in patients. Filter tilting and migration are two of the most common and serious side effects harming patients.

Many of the claims of filter fracture involve those that were in place for more than one year. Researchers suggest that these filters might break down over time, ultimately leading to fracture and migration injuries. This is why many doctors try to remove an IVC filter as soon as possible after the incident happens. The filter might also perforate the vein, which is a life-threatening condition.

In other IVC filter lawsuits, patients have survived but had to cope with severe symptoms and problems.

If you or someone you love has been injured by an IVC filter, contact the experienced attorneys at McDonald Worley today. The case evaluation is free.