Vortex Port Lawsuit Claims Defective AngioDynamics Device Caused Infection, Pulmonary Embolism

Thousands of port catheter lawsuits allege implantable devices from manufacturers like AngioDynamics and C.R. Bard are prone to infections, blood clots, fractures and other serious complications.

A South Carolina woman has filed a Vortex port lawsuit alleging the implantable AngioDynamics device caused her to suffer pulmonary embolisms and a serious infection that ultimately required surgical removal of the port catheter.

The complaint (PDF) was brought by Randell S. Dixon in the U.S. District for the Southern District of California on June 24, naming AngioDynamics Inc. and Navilyst Medical Inc. as the defendants.

Dixon claims the companies sold a defective Vortex port catheter despite knowing it posed an increased risk of infection, catheter failure and other life-threatening complications.

Port Catheter Risks

Implantable port catheters are medical devices placed beneath the skin to provide long-term access to a patient’s bloodstream for medications, chemotherapy, blood products and other intravenous treatments. The systems, which include the AngioDynamics Vortex Port, SmartPort and Xcela, consist of a small implanted port connected to a flexible catheter that delivers medication directly into a vein.

In recent years, AngioDynamics and other manufacturers of implantable port catheters, including C.R. Bard, have faced increasing product liability claims alleging their devices are susceptible to infections, blood clots, catheter fractures and other serious failures. Plaintiffs contend the catheter materials and design can deteriorate over time, creating surfaces that promote the buildup of bacteria and blood products, which may increase the risk of severe complications.

Those allegations have led to a growing number of AngioDynamics port catheter lawsuits filed by patients across the country. The complaints claim the company was aware its devices presented an increased risk of failure but continued to market and sell them without providing adequate safety warnings.

Vortex Port Lawsuit Allegations

In the lawsuit, Dixon says she received an AngioDynamics Vortex port in October 2017 to provide vascular access for treatment of sickle cell disease.

She alleges she was later diagnosed with a pulmonary embolism in May 2020, and then suffered another pulmonary embolism in June 2023. At that time, physicians also determined the implanted port had become infected, recommended removal, and surgically explanted the device days later.

Dixon contends the Vortex catheter was defectively designed because it incorporated excessive amounts of barium sulfate into the catheter material, allegedly weakening the device over time and creating microscopic surface defects that promote the buildup of blood products and bacteria. The complaint claims those defects substantially increase the risk of infection, blood clots, catheter fracture and other serious complications.

The complaint alleges AngioDynamics knew for years that the Vortex and other implantable port catheters were associated with reports of fractures, infections, blood clots, perforations and other severe injuries, yet continued marketing the devices without adequately warning physicians or patients.

“Defendants advertised, promoted, marketed, sold, and distributed the Vortex as a safe medical device when Defendants knew or should have known the Vortex was not safe for its intended purposes and that the product could cause serious medical problems.”

— Randell S. Dixon v. AngioDynamics Inc. et al.

According to Dixon’s Vortex port lawsuit, the manufacturers also concealed numerous adverse event reports by submitting them through the FDA’s former Alternative Summary Reporting program, which prevented many reports from becoming publicly available for years. She contends AngioDynamics continued marketing the devices as safe instead of redesigning the catheter or recalling the product.

The filing raises allegations of negligence, design defect, manufacturing defect, failure to warn, breach of implied and express warranties, fraudulent concealment and violations of South Carolina consumer protection laws. It seeks compensatory and punitive damages for Dixon’s injuries and other losses.

Port Catheter Lawsuits

The lawsuit joins hundreds of other AngioDynamics port catheter lawsuits pending in a federal multidistrict litigation before U.S. District Judge Jinsook Ohta in the Southern District of California, where coordinated pretrial proceedings are underway for claims alleging the company’s implantable port catheters were defectively designed.

As the litigation progresses, the parties are expected to prepare a small group of representative cases for bellwether trials, which could help shape future AngioDynamics port catheter settlement negotiations by showing how juries respond to common evidence and legal arguments.

Similar claims are also being pursued in thousands of Bard PowerPort lawsuits pending before U.S. District Judge David G. Campbell in the District of Arizona. Those cases likewise allege defects in implantable port catheters increased the risk of fractures, thrombosis, infections and other serious complications.

The first Bard PowerPort bellwether trial concluded in May with a split outcome, as jurors rejected failure-to-warn and consumer fraud claims but were unable to reach a unanimous verdict on the design defect allegations. The plaintiff has since asked for a new trial, arguing the jury was given improper instructions that led to the verdict.

Several additional bellwether trials are scheduled through early 2027, and if the litigation is not resolved through settlements or other means, individual cases may ultimately be returned to federal courts nationwide for separate trials.

Sign up for more legal news that could affect you or your family.