A new study indicates what many within the healthcare industry have increasingly come to suspect about IVC (Inferior Vena Cava) filters: the device is not associated with a reduction in patient mortality. At the same time, the implantation of the filters during catheter-based lytic therapy procedures has significantly increased treatment costs. It seems patients and their insurance providers are paying a lot of money for very little in the way of results.
Thousands of lawsuits have been filed against some of the largest manufacturers of IVC Filters, which are designed to trap blood clots passing through arteries and heading for the lungs. Now, litigation against one of the smaller manufacturers of these devices, Cordis Corporation, is picking up steam.
Over 4000 lawsuits have been filed against the two largest manufacturers of IVC (inferior vena cava) filters. In March, the first bellwether trial for these suits, against C.R. Bard and Cook Medical, will be heard. Patients around the country suffering as a result of defective IVC filters are waiting anxiously to see how the justice system will handle their plight.
A bellwether trial on October 23, 2017 will structure arguments for future matters pertaining to faulty IVC filter devices. This case is relevant for victims of faulty IVC filters because it will determine whether the manufacturer was negligent in selling and producing a product that has allegedly caused a number of injuries and fatalities.
In 2010, the FDA issued a safety warning over inferior vena cava (IVC) filters, a type of vascular filter implanted into the heart by radiologists or surgeons in order to presumably prevent life-threatening pulmonary emboli (PEs). In the years following the warning, the rate of implantation slowed, although it is still more than 10x higher than in Europe.