More and more people who have been injured by the use of faulty inferior vena cava (IVC) filters are making the decision to file an IVC filter lawsuit. These individuals who underwent IVC filter complications claim the medical devices have design defects and were not well tested before going to market.
In just the last couple of months, hundreds of plaintiffs have added their names to two separate multi-district litigation (MDL) proceedings against IVC filter companies C.R. Bard and Cook Medical, Inc. The patients in these IVC filter lawsuits allege that both organizations failed to warn the common public about the possible health risks associated with Bard IVC filters and Cook IVC filters.You can also consult your ivc case with bard ivc filter lawsuit.
An IVC filter is a small, cone-shaped medical device that is implanted into the inferior vena cava, just below the kidneys. The inferior vena cava (vena cava is Latin for ‘hollow vein’) carries blood from the lower body up to the heart. IVC filters are designed to capture an embolism—or blood clot—that has cut away from one of the deep veins in the leg as it travels up to the heart and lungs.
The problem discussed in the IVC filter lawsuits is that the filters can separate and move within the inferior vena cava. This movement is called IVC filter migration and it is one of many IVC filter complications. An IVC filter can also break, allowing shards of the device to move through the inferior vena cava into other organs, most notably the heart. IVC filters were made to fulfill an essential task, but a growing number of plaintiffs who have chosen to join an IVC filter lawsuit claim that some filters have a higher risk of breaking, potentially creating life-threatening damage.