The Bard Implantable PowerPort, also known as the BardPort, is an implantable catheter device used for intravenous fluid or drug administration. It is used with treatments such as chemotherapy to carry medicine into your bloodstream. Bard Access Systems Inc., a Becton, Dickinson, and Company branch, manufactures the Bard PowerPort implantable port device.
Bard PowerPort catheters are made of titanium and plastic, with a polyurethane substance called ChronoFlex AL. This substance is a polyurethane and barium sulfate blend. A silicone septum is used in implantable ports for drug access, and catheters are used for intravenous delivery and blood removal. The Bard PowerPort device is placed under the skin on the chest or arm. The slim implantable port is linked to a catheter connected to a significant central vein, enabling medicine to enter the circulation.
This Bard PowerPort device has been linked to difficulties and flaws. Injuries might include device migration, fractures, blood clots, infections, thrombosis, embolisms, and even death. Consequently, multiple Bard PowerPort lawsuits have been launched against the company and its subsidiaries.
Bard PowerPort: Complications & Lawsuits
Due to product issues, Bard PowerPort lawsuits have increased over the last several years. Individuals who suffered severe injuries after having a Bard PowerPort implanted due to a PowerPort fracture or implantable port malfunction have brought these cases.
Bard Access Systems Inc. and Becton Dickinson [the parent company] are being sued for damages. Product liability claims assert that Bard knew of the device’s flaws; these actions have been consolidated into a single class action lawsuit in Arizona. They also claim that Bard actively and aggressively marketed the PowerPort as safe despite knowing of numerous reports of catheter fracture, port infection, and other severe injuries and that Bard did not make any changes to the design of the BardPort to make it safer or adequately warn of the risks associated with the PowerPort.
Plouff Law is currently taking new claims from anyone who had a Bard PowerPort port catheter device inserted and was harmed due to a fracture, migration, or other implant problems.
Complications brought by Bard PowerPort devices
Serious injuries and consequences with Bard PowerPorts may vary from moderate to severe. Examples include infections, embolisms, broken or migrated catheters, DVTs, lasting damage, and tragic deaths. Numerous Bard PowerPort settlement lawsuits have been filed due to these implantable ports.
A broken PowerPort is a frequent problem that may lead to severe injuries and even vascular system damage. A typical problem with Bard PowerPort devices is catheter infection at the injection port location. When the device cracks or degrades, the faulty material lets bacteria in, which may cause life-threatening illnesses.
The PowerPort is prone to migration after implantation due to design defects that also render it prone to fractures. Parts of the flexible tube implanted in blood vessels are vulnerable to this. In many cases, the removal of the devices and subsequent medical treatment must be performed as an emergency operation.
Have there been any recalls of the Bard PowerPort device
Bard issued a voluntary recall for three PowerPort® models in March 2020, which the FDA assigned as Class 2. Bard corrected the potential issue that led to the recall (an incorrect part being included in a port kit), and in February 2022, FDA terminated the recall.
Bard PowerPort Lawsuit Updates
As of August 9, 2023, all federal PowerPort matters were transferred to the United States District Court for the District of Arizona to be heard by the Honorable Judge David Campbell. Since his 2003 appointment, Judge Campbell has presided over several Multidistrict litigations (MDLs).
July 27, 2023 – The plaintiffs requested preliminary proceedings on the Bard PowerPort lawsuits be combined before the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (“JPML”). Since the lawsuits have already been filed in the Western District of Missouri, the plaintiffs have requested moving the proceedings there for consolidation. The defendant argued against the consolidation of the cases because it believed that the PowerPort did not cause some of the injuries claimed by the plaintiffs. If the JPML were inclined to merge the cases, the defendant suggested Utah or Arizona as possible sites.
June 16, 2023 – The United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation held a hearing in San Francisco on July 27, 2023, to consider whether a consolidated federal MDL should be established. All federal court cases, regardless of their origin, would be assigned to the same judge if one were to be established. The judge will probably choose a subset of cases to put on trial to test the waters.
May 24, 2023 – Multiple plaintiffs requested that their Bard PowerPort claims be consolidated with other actions of a similar kind and transferred to the Western District of Missouri. The petition claims that at least 10 cases have been filed in different federal districts nationwide, with many more to come.
Do You Qualify for the Bard PowerPort Lawsuit?
If you or a loved one had a Bard PowerPort implanted by a doctor and afterward suffered an injury or Bard Port complications, you can bring a lawsuit against Bard. If you want to know whether you qualify, you’ll need to contact our attorneys.
Injuries that may be eligible for Bard PowerPort lawsuits include the following:
- Clots in the blood vessel (e.g., a pulmonary embolism or a deep vein thrombosis)
- Punctures of the heart
- Bleeding, also known as a hematoma.
- Infection
- Tissue death (or necrosis)
- Fluid accumulation around your heart (pericardial effusion).
- Chronic or excruciating pain
- Bruising, tearing, or puncturing of vital organs or tissues
When meeting with an attorney, it is essential to have documentation of your medical problems and symptoms at hand. A lawyer can assist you in obtaining medical documents if you are uncertain about your diagnosis.
Consult an attorney immediately if you wish to file a lawsuit because of a defective Bard PowerPort device. However, don’t wait too long because there is a statute of limitations for product liability lawsuits.
Bard Should Have Known About the Issues With the PowerPort
Bard received many “adverse event reports” (“AERs”) from healthcare professionals alleging that the PowerPort fractured after implantation shortly after the device’s introduction to the market. Bard also received many adverse event reports (AERs) stating that the internal vascular of the implant had been punctured.
Because of these reports, Bard knew or should have known, that the PowerPort had a far greater potential failure rate than competing blood products. Bard also should have known that the PowerPort’s issues stemmed from ChronoFlex manufacturing defects.
