Bard Port Catheter Fracture Caused Fragment Migration to Pulmonary Artery, Case Report Finds

Fractured Bard port catheter had been implanted for only six months, a much shorter timeframe than is usually seen in similar cases.

Amid a growing number of lawsuits involving Bard port catheter fractures, migration and infection claims, a new case report describes an incident in which a spontaneous catheter fracture caused a fragment to migrate into a patient’s pulmonary artery before the device was removed.

The case report, published in the peer-reviewed journal Cureus on January 27, details the experience of a 69-year-old man who developed a retained catheter fragment after a Bard port catheter fractured without warning. Doctors involved in the case said the problem was not discovered until after the port had already been surgically removed, forcing the patient to undergo a second procedure to retrieve the broken catheter piece from a blood vessel.

Central venous access ports, often referred to as port catheters or port-a-caths, are implantable medical devices used to deliver chemotherapy, antibiotics and other intravenous treatments over extended periods. The devices consist of a small reservoir implanted beneath the skin, connected to a flexible catheter that is threaded into a central vein, most commonly through the subclavian or internal jugular vein.

Bard PowerPort Lawsuits

In recent years, Bard port catheters, including PowerPort devices and related models, have been the subject of a growing number of product liability lawsuits filed in courts across the United States due to complications such as catheter fracture, migration, infection and thrombosis.

Many of the Bard PowerPort lawsuits allege that the use of barium sulfate in the catheter material, added to make the device radiopaque and visible on imaging studies, caused the catheters to become more brittle over time. According to the lawsuits, that alleged brittleness increased the risk of cracking, fracture and fragmentation, which in turn could lead to catheter migration, vascular injury, infection or the need for additional surgical procedures.

As of February 2026, more than 2,670 Bard port catheter lawsuits have been consolidated into a federal multidistrict litigation in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona before Judge David G. Campbell, where coordinated pretrial proceedings are underway. The litigation focuses on whether the design and material composition of certain Bard port catheters rendered them unreasonably dangerous, and whether adequate warnings were provided about the risk of fracture and migration.

While Bard has denied the allegations and maintains that its port catheter devices are safe when used as intended, plaintiffs claim that the manufacturer knew about the potential catheter failure issues for years, pointing to past adverse event data reported to officials.

Bard Port Catheter Fracture and Migration Report

According to the case report, the patient had a Bard central venous access port catheter (9.6 French, Bard Medical) implanted under the skin near his collarbone about six months earlier. The port was used to deliver chemotherapy and nutrition while he was being treated for recurrent stomach cancer. When the patient later went to the hospital complaining of redness, irritation and discomfort around the port site, doctors suspected a possible infection and decided the device should be surgically removed.

Imaging performed several days earlier showed the Bard port catheter in the correct position. However, a chest X-ray taken in the emergency room shortly before surgery later showed that part of the catheter had already broken off and traveled through the bloodstream into the patient’s left pulmonary artery, a major blood vessel that carries blood from the heart to the lungs. That issue was not recognized before the surgery took place.

During the operation, doctors removed the Bard port catheter without any obvious complications. It was only after the procedure that they realized a section of the catheter, measuring about three and a half inches, was missing. A follow-up chest X-ray confirmed that the broken catheter fragment had become lodged in the pulmonary artery, requiring the patient to undergo a second procedure later that same day to remove the fragment through a blood vessel.

The authors of the report noted that catheter fractures and retained catheter fragments are generally considered rare, especially when a port catheter has only been implanted for a relatively short period of time. In most documented cases, broken or retained catheter pieces occur after ports have been in place for several years, often due to scar tissue forming around the catheter and making removal more difficult.

In this case, the Bard port catheter had only been implanted for six months, making the fracture unexpected. The authors explained that repeated pressure in the area between the collarbone and the first rib, sometimes referred to as “pinch-off syndrome,” can place stress on catheters over time and may contribute to cracking or breakage, particularly when ports are placed through veins near the collarbone.

Based on what happened, the authors suggested that doctors should review existing chest imaging or consider ordering a chest X-ray before removing certain port catheters.

Port Catheter Injury Multidistrict Litigation

With the Bard PowerPort multidistrict litigation continuing to move forward, attention is increasingly focused on what lies ahead in 2026, as the first cases are prepared for trial and pressure begins to build around potential settlement discussions.

One of the most significant developments in the litigation is the start of the first bellwether trials, which are scheduled to begin on April 21, 2026, and will involve claims that a Bard PowerPort device caused a serious infection.

Bellwether cases are a small group of lawsuits selected to go before juries first, serving as test cases to help both sides evaluate how jurors respond to the evidence and legal arguments. The outcomes often play an important role in shaping the direction of settlement negotiations in large product liability cases.

Additional bellwether trials involving other alleged injuries, including catheter fractures and migration, are expected to follow on July 7, August 18, October 13, and December 1, of this year, as well as on February 2, 2027.

With jury trials approaching, lawyers indicate that this stage of an MDL is often when meaningful settlement talks begin to take shape. While no Bard PowerPort settlement has been announced and the manufacturer continues to deny wrongdoing, the prospect of public trials, sworn testimony and jury verdicts may increase incentives for both sides to explore potential resolutions.