The Trouble With IVC Filters Continues

ivc filters

For those of you who are only just tuning in to the problems with IVC filters, we’ll give you a quick rundown (before we dive into the update). C.R. Bard is a New Jersey-based medical device manufacturer. They are a giant in their industry, and until recent years, were a trusted source of medical devices for healthcare providers across the country. Bard is one of 11 manufacturers who make inferior vena cava (IVC) filters, and while the majority of filters are implanted without issue, those produced by Bard have caused nothing but problems over the years.

Bard’s “recovery” filter was given FDA clearance in 2002, and it didn’t take long for the troublesome reports to begin rolling in. According to NBC:

A confidential study commissioned by Bard showed that the Recovery filter had higher rates of relative risk for death, filter fracture and movement than all of its competitors. An outside doctor hired to conduct the study wrote that “further investigation…is urgently warranted.”

However, rather than pursue the matter further, the company released what was essentially the exact same device under a different name. Now called the G2 Filter, the device was reintroduced as a new and improved version, but did nothing to alleviate the constant barrage of complaints and negative reports.

Both the Recover and the G2 filters were known to be dangerous and should have been pulled from the market long before it came to this. Today, as it stands, 27 people have died and countless others have been injured by this faulty device that has been delivered to consumers by an irresponsible manufacturer.

Not surprisingly, the number of personal injury lawsuits surrounding the use of these dangerous devices is growing daily. The team at Coxwell & Associates has been watching this progress closely, and here is what we know:

  • In a confidential memo in 2005, a Bard vice president expressed concern about possible migration and tilting of the device and the potential for perforation of the vessels. You can read the rest of that memo in its original form HERE. It’s anybody’s guess as to why this man’s concerns were ignored.
  • Another document released in 2010 contains data that proves the Bard G2 filter had more fractures, migrations, and reported problems than any of its competitors. This data was also largely ignored, although it was not long after its release that the filters were finally
  • Removal surgery is just as dangerous as the device itself. This procedure requires a very specialized technique, and there is a possibility that the legs will still fracture during the process of surgical removal. No patient should have to live with this kind of fear.

It’s a fact that you can no longer rely on medical device manufacturers to act in your best interests. It’s a matter of only a few lives versus millions of dollars in their pockets. For a corporation of that size, there’s no tough decision to make.

If you have received an inferior vena cava filter to prevent the flow of blood clots after some other surgical procedure, contact a member of our legal team to determine your best course of action. We’ll help you determine who the manufacturer is, and if the maker is C.R. Bard, we can help. The attorneys of Coxwell & Associates can be reached by phone at (601) 948-1600. We look forward to helping you get the compensation you deserve.

Disclaimer: This blog is intended as general information purposes only, and is not a substitute for legal advice. Anyone with a legal problem should consult a lawyer immediately.

Disclaimer: This blog is intended as general information purposes only, and is not a substitute for legal advice. Anyone with a legal problem should consult a lawyer immediately.

Contact Information