Everything to Know About Michigan Bard IVC Lawsuits
The Bard IVC Filter for the prevention of blood clots moving to the inferior vena cava filter has been scrutinized by doctors since 2010 for its tendency to fracture and break up causing permanent damage to the heart, lungs and other internal organs and raising the risk of pulmonary embolism.
IVC filter lawyers have been involved with this circumstance, and there have been over 9,000 malpractice cases brought against Bard medical for the faulty design of the device as well as their holding back knowledge of its tendency to cause injury to patients.
The law firm of Cochran, Kroll, & Associates, P.C., has handled many such mass tort cases in Michigan and is an excellent resource if a patient is experiencing health issues because of this implant.
In Michigan, Liza Davis was a patient who had a Bard IVC device placed in her Inferior Vena Cava in 2006, and in 2008, the device fractured and migrated to her heart causing permanent heart damage. The IVC Filter lawyers for Ms. Davis notified the courts that a settlement was reached in 2013. This is one instance where the patient was successful, but not all patients are. It is important to note several aspects of the litigation involving this medical malpractice and how to approach a lawsuit in Michigan.
Who is at Risk?
Any person who has had an IVC Filter placed in their vein to stop and prevent blood clots from moving through the vein to the heart and lungs is at risk for complications. In most cases, the doctors recommend the devices be removed after 5-7 weeks because of the potential of breakdown, but often this is not the case, and the IVC Filters can remain in the vein permanently.
The metal struts or legs, which resemble the legs of a spider, are very fragile and can break off and move through the bloodstream and enter the heart and lungs. The longer the IVC Filter remains in place the greater the risk of inferior vena cava IVC.
Usually, there is an attempt to remove the retrievable IVC filters after a period of time when the patient can use blood thinners, or the risks of blood clots diminish. However, even this can cause problems if the IVC filter gets lodged in the vein, tilts and cannot be moved, or fractures and breaks during removal. All of these instances can lead to permanent internal damage.
The FDA Bard IVC Filter Warning
In 2010, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a report and a warning that they had evidence of over 900 cases where there had been problems with the IVC Filters case causing injuries to patients.
In 2014 they followed this report with a study that revealed that it may be more dangerous to leave the IVC Filters in the body for an extended period of time. This report also indicated that the use of the IVC Filter for this type of treatment might not outweigh the risks of using it.
In 2015 the FDA sent a letter to C.R. Bard Medical citing that they were manufacturing two types of IVC Filters that had not been approved or cleared by the FDA, but more importantly, Bard had known about the failures of the devices, and they had not reported it to consumers.
The concept of IVC Filter lawsuits have been filed for a claim of medical malpractice is not a regular undertaking for most patients who just want to get well. However, in the cases dealing with the IVC Filter, there is a great deal of evidence and reporting that indicates that actions should be taken when there is the threat of permanent physical damage.
According to NBC News, the adverse event reports that the federal court has given a product liability claim up to 3.6 million dollars. IVC Filter manufacturers have had to pay directly in class action lawsuits.
At the law firm of Cochran, Kroll, & Associates, P.C., we understand the complexities of this medical event, and we can assist you in seeking compensation when you have been injured in the United States.
Contact us toll-free at 1-866-MICH-LAW (1-866-466-9912) for a free consultation. We never charge a fee unless a recovery is made.
Disclaimer : The information provided is general and not for legal advice. The blogs are not intended to provide legal counsel and no attorney-client relationship is created nor intended.