Although countless have sued manufacturers of IVC filters for the filter moving or migrating, the IVC market trend is soaring. In a recent study that involved 3M Healthcare, Abbott Laboratories, All Pro Corporation, Accellent, and others, all expect a drastic uptick in business.
Within the study, they talk about factors driving this growth, insight into each business’s market size, and of course, profitability prospects. What’s missing is the attention to the possible troubles for victims of IVC failure. As discussed, these filters should capture embolisms prior to a deadly encounter with the lungs, brain, or heart. Over the years, they have gained some traction, and while it seems that growth for the IVC market is all good, there’s another side.
Drugwatch noted that as of July 2019, there were more than 14,000 lawsuits against two primary manufacturers. One of those manufacturers was included in this study, Cook Medical. Although it seems as if these two manufacturers are isolated that someone would not pursue a lawsuit against 3M or Abbott Laboratories, it’s only a matter of time. There is no fear in taking major medical manufacturers to court, and if anything, the Cook Medical and Bard lawsuits should teach the remainder of these companies to tread lightly.
One thing noted in this study that did stand out was that they had begun categorizing the IVC filter into three primary categories. There is the perpetual IVC filter, which should remain in place for an extended period of time. Then there are the recyclable IVC and the temporary IVC. It is likely that this division of products can allow companies to have greater control, as well as boosted communication with doctors on the timeline of effectiveness. Hopefully, doctors and their patients can learn to use these categories to have realistic expectations on IVC traveling and migration.
If you or a loved one have suffered serious side effects from an IVC filter, reach out to our office today.