Bard PowerPort Lawsuits

As of December 2024, there were 813 active Bard PowerPort lawsuits pending in Arizona multidistrict litigation (MDL) 3081 before Judge David G. Campbell.

We’ve researched court documents and spoken to lawyers to give you the following updates.

Law firms are actively accepting Bard PowerPort cases and lawyers expect many more people to file. There is a deadline to file a lawsuit for the implanted port catheter. If you’re interested in filing a PowerPort lawsuit, speak to an attorney right away to preserve your right to file.

People are filing lawsuits against the makers of the Bard PowerPort because they claim that the device’s faulty design increases the risk of organ damage, infection and blood clots. Design defects can cause high injection flow rates and a tendency for the catheter to break apart.

“Bard PowerPort injuries result in numerous damages to potential victims, including sustaining medical bills, future medical expenses, lost wages or lost earning capacity, permanent disability, pain and suffering, emotional damages, and other compensatory damages,” said attorney Brendan Smith of Simmons Hanly Conroy.

A functioning port catheter is an implanted device that allows simple access to veins for the delivery of medications such as chemotherapy. The port contains a small reservoir for injecting medication. A doctor implants the device under the skin. The catheter rests inside the vein and is typically silicone or polyurethane.

As patients receive medication through the Bard PowerPort, the design causes the injection flow to increase, which creates pressure against the plastic tubing. The barium sulfate tubing can fracture and cause bacteria to build in the small crack.

Over time, the pressure releases plastic fragments into the bloodstream.

Becton Dickinson, the medical technology company that manufactures and sells the Bard PowerPort, may have known about these issues for several years. The allegations against the company claim it concealed thousands of reports from doctors and patients citing injuries caused by Bard PowerPort device failures.

Manufacturers could conceal the elevated incidence of device malfunctions as permitted by 21 CFR 803.19 of the FDA’s Alternative Summary Reporting program. Lawsuits against BD and its subsidiaries claim they failed to represent device safety and warn health care providers or issue a timely Bard PowerPort recall.

You may be eligible to file a Bard PowerPort lawsuit if your doctor implanted a Bard PowerPort device and you experienced a related injury. Only a licensed attorney can tell you if you are eligible.

A Bard PowerPort lawyer may ask about your experiences after you received the device. Make sure to have a record of your symptoms and medical issues with you when you speak to an attorney. If you aren’t sure about your diagnosis, a lawyer may be able to help you obtain medical records.

“If you or a loved one used a Bard implantable port catheter device and were subsequently injured, you may be eligible to file a Bard PowerPort lawsuit and pursue financial compensation,” Smith said.

If you want to file a lawsuit, speak to an attorney immediately. If the time runs out on your statute of limitations, you won’t be able to file a claim.

You should consider experience and success rates when choosing a Bard PowerPort lawyer. A lawyer with expertise in personal injury, medical devices and defective device lawsuits will likely have the most success with your case.

An experienced Bard PowerPort lawsuit lawyer will guide you through filing a medical device case. Your lawyer should explain the entire litigation process. They’ll help you file your complaint in court and negotiate your settlement. They’ll fight for you in court if your case goes to trial.

Because lawsuits are still in the early phases, it’s too early to tell what you can expect from a PowerPort settlement. There haven’t been any trials scheduled for the Bard PowerPort, and there have not yet been any settlements.

But this isn’t the first time Bard has faced lawsuits. In 2014, Bard agreed to settle lawsuits against its defective pelvic mesh products for $21 million. Six years later, Bard settled further lawsuits for $60 million related to the marketing of its pelvic mesh products.

Since 2021, Bard has faced more than 11,000 federal lawsuits for its polypropylene hernia mesh products. These hernia mesh lawsuits claim the implants caused infections, organ perforation, intestinal blockage and other injuries. There haven’t been any jury verdicts or settlements in these cases yet.

Bard also faces more than 1,300 federal IVC filter lawsuits. Inferior vena cava filters aim to reduce the risk of blood clots in people who cannot take blood thinners. NBC News linked Bard to 39 deaths caused by the IVC filters. In April 2018, a jury in Arizona awarded Sherr-Una Booker more than $3.5 million in damages based on her claim that Bard failed to warn of the dangers of the IVC filter. In 2020, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the verdict.

To date, there is no recall for Bard PowerPort related to the potential catheter risks. In March 2020, the FDA posted a Class 2 recall notice for several models of the Bard PowerPort for a separate issue. The recall recommended that all health care facilities send back affected PowerPort devices.

The Health Sciences Authority issued an urgent medical device recall notification in September 2019. In a letter, BD and Bard outlined the reason for the recall as an incorrect barb tip for the included catheter in the PowerPort. The letter noted that “there is the potential that the catheter could become dislodged from the tunneler.”

BD claimed in the same statement that the error was “unlikely to lead to serious injury.” This recall failed to acknowledge the issues with the ChronoFlex catheter tubing itself. The lawsuits indicate that the high barium sulfate concentration in the polyurethane polymer causes a loss of integrity.