Interested in the Bard PowerPort lawsuit?
Bard PowerPort Lawsuit
Updates and Settlement Information
The Bard PowerPort is a family of implanted port devices, which are placed below the skin to provide a catheter port for delivery of medications.
A number of individuals throughout the United States are now pursuing a Bard PowerPort lawsuit after experiencing serious and potentially life-threatening injuries, including infections, blood clots and other problems.
These product liability lawsuits allege that design defects with the Bard PowerPort may have caused the catheter tube to crack, fracture or migrate.
Lawyers are pursuing Bard PowerPort settlements and lawsuit payouts for individuals throughout the U.S. who have experienced complications with the implantable catheter ports, including:
- Blood Clots
- Catheter Fracture
- Wrongful Death
Submit information about a potential lawsuit for yourself or a loved one to have a lawyer review whether you may be able to establish a claim for compensation.
Bard PowerPort Lawsuit Overview
The FDA approved the first Bard PowerPort device in 2000, as a port cath that is implanted under the skin to provide long-term and easy access to attach a catheter for the delivery of medication, intravenous fluids, parenteral nutrition solutions, and blood products.
Since the product was introduced, a large number of individuals have reported problems with the Bard PowerPort, including instances where the catheter port material cracked, caused the catheter to fracture or migrate. These complications have resulted in severe infections, blood clots, cardiac punctures and many other life threatening injuries.
Bard PowerPort lawsuits are now being pursued against the manufacturer, alleging that there are dangerous design defects with the implantable port, and that the risk of port catheter complications associated with the products were not adequately disclosed to patients or the medical community.
Bard PowerPort Multidistrict Litigation
Due to the rapidly growing number of Bard PowerPort fracture and migration lawsuits being filed throughout various different federal courts, the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) issued a transfer order (PDF) in response to a motion to consolidate the claims on August 8, 2023, ordering all PowerPort lawsuits to be centralized before one judge for pretrial proceedings.
While each of the Bard PowerPort lawsuits will remain its own individual lawsuit, the cases will be centralized in the U.S. District for the District of Arizona, where the claims will be assigned to Judge David G. Campbell, who previously presided over a Bard IVC filter lawsuit MDL, which was established in August 2015 and included more than 8,000 claims at it’s peak.
As part of the management of the Bard Port lawsuits MDL, it is expected that Judge Campbell will establish a bellwether process, where a small group of representative claims will be selected for case-specific discovery and a series of early trial dates.
Who is eligible for a Bard PowerPort lawsuit?
Financial compensation may be available through a Bard catheter lawsuit for individuals who received an implantable PowerPort and suffered any of the following complications:
- Infections (sepsis or septic shock)
- Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT)
- Hemorrhaging or Bleeding Injuries
- Cardiac/pericardial tamponade
- Cardiac arrhythmia
- Severe and persistent pain
- Perforations of tissues, vessels and organs
- Patient death
- Other injuries caused by fractured PowerPort catheter
To determine if you or a loved one may have a case, submit information for review by a port catheter injury lawyer, who will help evaluate the circumstances and determine if it can be established that problems were caused by a Bard PowerPort failure. Attorneys handle all Bard port cases on a contingency fee basis, which means that there are no fees or expenses paid unless a settlement or lawsuit payout is received.
Find Out If You Qualify for Port Catheter Compensation
2023 Bard Port Lawsuit Updates
September 2023 Update: Lawyers will meet with Judge Campbell for an initial Bard PowerPort lawsuits status conference on September 18, to discuss the organizational structure for the litigation.
August 2023 Update: The JPML issued an order on August 8, transferring all Bard Port lawsuits to a new MDL to the U.S. District for the District of Arizona, where the claims will be assigned to Judge David G. Campbell for coordinated discovery and pretrial proceedings.
July 2023 Update: A panel of federal judges considered oral arguments on July 27, 2023, to determine whether to establish a Bard PowerPort lawsuit MDL and what is the most appropriate venue. Plaintiffs have proposed the MDL be established in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri, before either Judge Brian C. Wimes or Judge Stephen R. Bough, who are qualified and experienced jurists.
June 2023 Update: The manufacturers of the Bard PowerPort oppose consolidation of lawsuits over port catheter complications, indicating in a memorandum filed this month that the litigation would not benefit from an MDL, since claims involve different models of implantable ports that were used for various medical treatments. The manufacturers also indicated they have resolved a number of cases in the past with little difficulty, suggesting that prior Bard PowerPort settlements or resolutions were reached within an average of 18 months without any formal MDL consolidation.
May 2023 Update: Given common questions raised in a number of complaints filed throughout the federal court system, a motion was filed with the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML), seeking to consolidate and centralize all Bard implanted port lawsuits before one judge for discovery and pretrial proceedings.
What is the Bard PowerPort device?
The Bard PowerPort ClearVue Implantable Port and other similar Bard Ports are vascular access devices, which are implanted below the skin to provide a catheter port that allows easy delivery of medications to a patient’s bloodstream. It consists mainly of an injection port, where the needle is inserted to deliver medications; and a polyurethane catheter tube that carries the drug into the blood vessel.
The injection port contains a raised area where the needle is inserted for faster delivery of the medication. The medications then travel through a catheter that is placed inside one of the large central veins that carry blood to the heart.
Bard advertises that the PowerPort not only offers a faster and more convenient method of delivering medication or drawing blood, but that the PowerPort design can also withstand higher injection pressure. However, a growing number of individuals are now reporting serious injuries and pursuing lawsuits alleging that Bard PowerPort complications could have been avoided if the manufacturer had adequately disclosed risks associated with the devices.
What is wrong with Bard PowerPort devices?
PowerPort catheter tubes are made of a material that lawsuits allege is prone to fissuring, cracking and fracturing. The catheter tubing in many Bard PowerPort devices is made of a flexible polyurethane polymer called Chronoflex, which is a mixture of polyurethane and barium sulfate.
Lawsuits indicate that problems with the Bard PowerPort stem from the use of high concentrations of barium sulfate, which is a chemical compound that is known to cause polyurethane’s mechanical integrity to break down, potentially resulting in microfractures, degradation, fissuring and cracking.
Improper mixing during the manufacturing process may result in pockets of barium sulfate and entrapped air being distributed through the catheter body and surfaces, according to complaints filed. This can result in catheter cracks, fissures and pits. Surface degradation may also increase the risk of thromboembolism or blood clots.
Problems with Bard PowerPort Were Known for Years
In a number of Bard PowerPort injury lawsuits, plaintiffs maintain that Bard knew PowerPort catheter fractures, migrations and infections were being reported at higher rates than other similar products on the market, yet failed to act for years.
Bard Access Systems Inc., C.R. Bard, Inc. and Becton Dickson & Company now face lawsuit alleging that inadequate warnings were provided about the PowerPort problems for the medical community and the companies failed to conduct sufficient post-marketing surveillance to better identify reports of injury and death.
Plaintiffs maintain that serious and fatal injuries could have been avoided if a safer alternative design had been used, or a Bard PowerPort recall had been issued. Instead, complaints allege the manufacturers concealed their knowledge about problems with the Bard catheters and continued to actively advertise the PowerPort as safe.
Bard PowerPort Complications & Injuries
Bard catheter failures have been reported at higher-than-expected rates among individuals with a PowerPort, according to lawsuits, which point to unique design features that may explain these risks. Some of the most frequently cited complications with Bard catheters in lawsuits include:
Share Your Story
Were you injured by a malfunctioning Bard PowerPort? Share your story with AboutLawsuits.com and have your comments reviewed by a lawyer to determine if you may be eligible for a lawsuit.
Is there a Bard PowerPort recall?
No. The medical device manufacturer has not issued a Bard PowerPort recall over the catheter risks alleged in these lawsuits. Many plaintiffs maintain that the manufacturer should have recalled Bard PowerPort systems or altered the design to make the products safer, but the FDA has not required such an action. Even without recalling the port catheters from the market entirely, the manufacturer may be held liable for failing to establish and maintain adequate surveillance systems to identify Bard PowerPort problems, and failing to adequately inform or warn consumers and the medical community about the risks associated with the products.
Who is the Bard PowerPort lawsuit against?
Individuals throughout the U.S. have filed a Bard PowerPort lawsuit against the manufacturers of the device, including Becton Dickinson & Company, and its C.R. Bard and Bard Access Systems, Inc. subsidiaries. These claims are being pursued as individual product liability lawsuits, and claims typically do not involve Bard PowerPort malpractice lawsuit allegations against any of the medical providers, as plaintiffs point out that healthcare providers were also misled to believe the products were safe.
Is there a Bard PowerPort class action lawsuit?
Currently, there is not a Bard PowerPort class action lawsuit for individuals who suffered injuries or wrongful death after receiving the port catheter. These claims are being pursued as separate product liability lawsuits against the manufacturer.
Since the problems experienced by each plaintiff are different, the claims can not be litigated through one class representative. Therefore, each individual who suffered an injury will hire their own Bard PowerPort lawyer to investigate their claim and file a lawsuit on their behalf, establishing that their specific problems were a result of the Bard port catheter.
In the future, it is possible that a Bard PowerPort class action may be pursued for individuals who received the port catheter, but have not yet experienced any injury. Damages pursued through such a class action lawsuit over the Bard PowerPort may seek medical monitoring, refunds or compensation for the cost of port catheter procedures.
What is the average Bard PowerPort settlement amount or lawsuit payout?
There have not been any publicly disclosed Bard PowerPort settlements, and no individual case has gone before a jury. Therefore, there is not currently any average Bard PowerPort lawsuit payout or settlement amount. However, this page will be updated as future cases move forward and individual jury awards are returned.
The manufacturer has acknowledged in court filings that it has “resolved” a small number of individual lawsuits over the Bard PowerPort in the past, suggesting that settlements were reached in those cases within an average of about 18 months, and at least eight cases resolved without a single deposition being taken. The average amounts of the Bard PowerPort settlements have not been publicly disclosed.
As more and more individuals come forward to file Bard PowerPort lawsuits, it does not appear the manufacturer intends to establish any global Bard PowerPort settlement fund, and lawyers are now preparing for lengthy litigation to establish the widespread nature of injuries associated with the port catheters and negotiate individual settlements.
How is a PowerPort lawsuit settlement calculated?
Future settlement negotiations to resolve Bard PowerPort lawsuits will be based on the individual facts and circumstances in each claim, and each plaintiff will have an opportunity to decide whether to accept any settlement offer in their lawsuit.
Multiple factors are considered when calculating a Bard PowerPort lawsuit settlement, including the likelihood the claim would be successful at trial and the amount of damages a jury may award.
Some of the common factors considered when negotiating a Bard PowerPort settlement may include:
- Severity of injury or harm: This can encompass the nature of the physical injury, extent of pain and suffering, duration of the suffering, and any permanent disability or disfigurement caused by the PowerPort;
- Medical expenses: These include past, current, and future estimated medical costs related to medical treatment caused by the harm;
- Loss of earnings: This refers to the loss of income due to inability to work, either temporarily or permanently, due to the PowerPort injuries suffered;
- Punitive damages: These are damages meant to punish the manufacturers for particularly egregious behavior and deter similar behavior in the future. Whether punitive damages will be awarded in Bard PowerPort lawsuits has not yet been determined.
Examples of Bard PowerPort Lawsuits
Bard PowerPort Embolism and Infection Lawsuit: Judy Hicks filed a PowerPort embolism lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri on June 30, 2023, claiming she suffered a bloodstream infection and embolism due to a defective PowerPort Groshong catheter. Hicks claims the devices unreasonably dangerous design required her to undergo multiple surgeries, including a procedure to de-clot an embolism and another to remove the PowerPort.
Bard Chemo Port Fracture Lawsuit: Carrie Nedved filed a PowerPort fracture lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa on June 23, 2023, claiming that while she was undergoing chemotherapy for breast cancer, her PowerPort fractured and migrated, requiring her to undergo emergency surgery to remove fragments of the catheter that had traveled to her heart.
Bard PowerPort Wrongful Death Lawsuit: Christopher Cabello filed a wrongful death lawsuit on behalf of his deceased wife, Elizabeth, in the Superior Court of New Jersey Bergen County on May 18, 2023, claiming her death was largely caused by a defectively designed Bard PowerPort that fractured and leaked while undergoing treatment for bladder cancer. Cabello claims the fractured Bard PowerPort required Elizabeth to undergo major emergency surgery to remove the PowerPort, which was a substantial contributing factor to her death.
Bard PowerPort Infection Lawsuit: Jean Cunningham filed a Bard PowerPort infection lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri on April 24, 2023, claiming the device contained a defective design that caused it to crack while she was undergoing treatment for multiple sclerosis. Cunningham states that as a result of the Bard PowerPort fracturing, she developed an infection that has lead to permanent injuries and the need for catheter replacement surgery.
Bard PowerPort Lawsuit Over Bloodstream Infection: Mary Nelk filed a catheter infection lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey on February 28, 2023, claiming the Bard PowerPort failed and caused her to develop a bloodstream infection. Nelk claims the defective design of Bard’s catheters caused her multiple hospital admissions and have left her with severe and permanent injuries.
Bard PowerPort Thrombosis Lawsuit: Patrice Terry filed a port-a-cath lawsuit in the U.S. District Court Western District of Missouri on February 10, 2023, claiming a fractured PowerPort device caused her to develop deep vein thrombosis (DVT) in the jugular vein. Terry states that she was required to undergo major surgery as she was receiving chemotherapy through the PowerPort device to treat her colon cancer.
Have a Bard PowerPort Injury Lawyer Review Your Case
If you or a loved one were injured by an implantable catheter port, submit information about your potential claim for review by a product liability lawyer to determine whether a Bard PowerPort settlement or lawsuit payout may be available.
Bard PowerPort injury lawyers provide free claim evaluations and consultations. There are no fees or expenses unless a recovery is obtained in your case.
Free Case Evaluation
If you or a loved one experienced an injury from a Bard PowerPort device, submit information for review by a lawyer to determine if you may be eligible for a Bard PowerPort settlement.
JanineJuly 21, 2023 at 2:16 am
I have a bard power port since 2013 and never had any problems.. I wonder if it is just the newer ones?
PaulaMay 16, 2023 at 5:06 pm
I have a power port that when then access the port they been having problems with the blood draw.Also the chemo they gave me has like burn my skin on my hand that cause my palms of my hands to completely peel. I am worried that that medicine might have been to strong for the port? Could that medicine damage the port .?my skin is red and irritated. Do these port have expiration dates how long s[Show More]I have a power port that when then access the port they been having problems with the blood draw.Also the chemo they gave me has like burn my skin on my hand that cause my palms of my hands to completely peel. I am worried that that medicine might have been to strong for the port? Could that medicine damage the port .?my skin is red and irritated. Do these port have expiration dates how long should they be in for?
"*" indicates required fields