IVC filters were designed to prevent blood clots from reaching heart and lungs and causing pulmonary embolism. It is used in patients who have a history of or are at high risk of developing blood clots and cannot take the blood thinning medication.
These filters were only available as a permanently implanted device until recently the retrievable devices came into the market which promised to eliminate the long-term risks of a fracture or recurrent DVT. But these devices failed to perform as promised as victims filed for ivc filter lawsuit settlements claiming for financial reimbursement of their losses.
The huge popularity of IVC filters has been because it did not require any surgical incision. But there have been reports which showed the life threatening complications associated with these devices. For instance, published reports and studies with Bard’s IVC filters were linked with filter fracture, filter migration, IVC perforation, deep vein thrombosis, and filter embolization.
More recently, potentially deadly injuries such as pulmonary embolism, hemorrhage and strokes has also been linked with them.
FDA released a Safety Communication in 2010 as they had received 921 device adverse event reports about the devices. Of them, the following events were included:
- Device Migration – 328 Reports
- Device Embolization – 146 Reports
- Perforation of the Inferior Vena Cava – 70 Reports
- Filter Fracture – 56 Reports
Lawsuits and accusations
In the ivc filter lawsuit settlements, the patients may bring product liability (defective device) claims, negligence claims, as well as wrongful death claims, if applicable. They blame the product manufacturers for:
- Misrepresenting the benefits of the devices
- Failing to do proper clinical trials before releasing them into the market
- Constant branding the product as a safe and effective alternative
Any patient who has Bard or Cook IVC filter implanted in 2002 or later will qualify to make an IVC filter claim.
Blood Clot and Ivc Filter Lawsuit Settlements 