Inferior Cava Filter Lawsuits Highlight Inferior IVC Filters

The recent arrival of new chief executive officer Pete Yonkman at medical device manufacturer Cook Group Inc. provides a renewed platform for debate with respect to IVC filter lawsuits and where litigation fits in with the recently installed CEO’s list of priorities. The inferior vena cava filter is a medical device that is embedded in the area by which the device is identified, the inferior vena cava, which returns blood from the lower body to the heart.

various IVC lawsuits have taken a handful of manufacturers to task for making and marketing inferior vena cava filters that are – well – inferior. The devices have been known to break apart, move away from the original implantation zone or penetrate the blood vessel wall.You can get more knowledge on IVC filters through


Those manufacturers include C.R. Bard Inc. (Bard), which manufactures the Bard IVC filter. But the Cook filters have proven quite uncertain in their own right for patients. One study referenced by the Indianapolis Business Journal put the failure rate for the Cook IVC filters at 100 percent when implanted for 2.5 months or longer. The failures have for some patients appeared in organ damage and required various medical procedures to remove them.

So far, there are about 100 IVC filter lawsuits pending against Cook alone. Other lawsuits have targeted the Bard G2 IVC filter. But for Yonkman, the Cook lawsuits remain a headache he would like to settle. Beginning in 2012, the lawsuits have since been consolidated in federal court at Indianapolis.

Hope For Patients With IVC Filter?

The IVC filter retrieval claims come from interventional radiologists at Rush University Medical Center, whose work was published in November 2016 in Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology. Osman Ahmed, MD, primary author and interventional radiologist at Rush University Medical Center, said the team uses both standard retrieval methods and advanced tools to eliminate any type of filter. Included in the method is a way of snaring the filter and covering it to trap it and prevent it from breaking.

"Thanks to these methods, the Rush team has produced a 100 percent retrieval rate over the past five years, including difficult-to-remove filters from patients who have been referred to Rush from other hospitals," a news release from Rush Medical Center states. While some patients can undergo retrieval under informed sedation, those who require advanced retrieval might require the general anesthetic.

IVC filters are inserted into the inferior vena cava of patients who cannot take anticoagulant medications to reduce the risk of blood clots traveling to the heart and lungs. Some filters, however, are temporary but recent studies suggest they are left in longer than they should be, which can increase the risk of a serious complication, including having the device break and penetrate internal organs. In such cases, some doctors may not remove the filter for fear removal could cause more harm than good.If you are interested in knowing about ivc filter lawsuits you can head to

"Unfortunately, filters are not always removed once the initial threat of a blood clot traveling to the heart and lungs subsides, because there hasn't previously been knowledge of the potential risks of leaving them in," said Sreekumar Madassery, MD, an interventional radiologist at Rush University Medical Center.