Abbott Spinal Cord Stimulator Battery Problems Led to Repeat Surgeries, Lawsuit Claims

Lawsuit alleges Abbott made hundreds of changes to its spinal cord stimulator systems over two decades without conducting additional clinical testing or adequately warning patients and physicians.

Four individuals have filed a lawsuit alleging that certain Abbott spinal cord stimulators (SCS) are prone to battery problems that can cause painful malfunctions and device failures, leading to worsening symptoms and additional surgeries.

The complaint (PDF) was brought by Stephanie Giacovelli, Pamela Diamond, Billy Wright and Leticia Ramirez in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California on June 5, naming Abbott Laboratories as the sole defendant.

Plaintiffs claim Abbott substantially modified its spinal cord stimulator systems through hundreds of regulatory supplements over the last two decades, altering device components, firmware, battery systems and stimulation programming without conducting new clinical testing to validate the changes. They allege those modifications introduced new risks that were never adequately disclosed to patients or physicians.

Spinal Cord Stimulator Battery Problems

Spinal cord stimulators are implantable devices used to treat chronic pain, consisting of electrodes placed near the spinal cord and a battery-powered pulse generator implanted beneath the skin. The battery supplies the electrical stimulation intended to disrupt pain signals before they reach the brain, with the systems marketed as long-term solutions for patients suffering from persistent pain conditions.

However, an increasing number of reports have linked spinal cord stimulator battery problems to device failures requiring revision surgeries or complete removal of the implants. Patients have alleged that battery malfunctions can lead to loss of therapy, painful electrical shocks, charging failures, unexpected shutdowns and worsening pain symptoms.

These complaints have fueled a growing number of spinal cord stimulator lawsuits claiming manufacturers failed to adequately warn patients and physicians about the risks associated with device failures and other complications.

Abbott Spinal Cord Stimulator Failure Allegations

According to the complaint, Giacovelli underwent implantation of an Abbott spinal cord stimulator in April 2025 after a trial device reportedly provided pain relief. However, the permanent system allegedly failed to control her pain, and she experienced problems within months, requiring surgery to replace the battery. She later underwent another battery replacement procedure after the first replacement unit was damaged during a separate surgery.

The lawsuit alleges the device remained ineffective despite the additional procedures. During a later explant surgery, physicians allegedly discovered the spinal cord stimulator had never been properly connected to her spine.

The three other plaintiffs describe similar battery failures, ineffective pain relief, worsening symptoms and additional surgeries. 

Diamond alleges her Abbott spinal cord stimulator worsened her pain and caused numbness, dizziness, urinary incontinence, balance problems, neuropathy and cardiac issues. After multiple reprogramming attempts, she ultimately underwent surgery to have the system removed.

Wright claims the device caused worsening pain, electric shock sensations, numbness, urinary retention and an infection that required emergency hospitalization. He later underwent surgery to remove the system.

Ramirez alleges she required revision surgery after the implanted battery caused pain in her buttock. She claims the device later produced worsening pain and electric shock sensations, ultimately leading to removal of the system.

“During all times relevant to this Complaint Abbott fraudulently concealed from Plaintiffs the truth regarding the safety and efficacy of the SCS devices, and Plaintiffs could not have, with reasonable due diligence, determined such truth. In fact, to this day, Abbott continues to insist that its SCS devices are safe and efficacious.”

—  Stephanie Giacovelli et al. v. Abbott Laboratories

The complaint further alleges Abbott sales representatives played a direct role in programming and adjusting the spinal cord stimulators before and after implantation, often without meaningful physician oversight. Plaintiffs contend they relied on representations that the devices were safe, effective and capable of providing long-term pain relief when deciding to proceed with permanent implantation.

The lawsuit raises allegations of manufacturing defect, failure to warn, negligence, negligent misrepresentation, fraudulent concealment, breach of express and implied warranties and violations of consumer protection laws. The plaintiffs seek compensatory and punitive damages for physical injuries, pain and suffering, medical expenses and other losses allegedly caused by the Abbott spinal cord stimulator systems.

Spinal Cord Stimulator Injury Lawsuits

Due to overlapping allegations raised in lawsuits filed nationwide, plaintiffs asked the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) in February 2026 to establish a spinal cord stimulator MDL that would coordinate all federal claims involving Boston Scientific and Abbott devices before a single judge.

After hearing arguments in May, the JPML issued a transfer order on June 5 creating an MDL for the Boston Scientific spinal cord stimulator lawsuits in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. However, the panel declined to include filings involving other manufacturers.

Spinal cord stimulator lawyers continue to review claims over Boston Scientific, Abbott, Medtronic and Nevro implants for individuals who experienced spinal cord stimulator battery problems or other complications such as:

Individuals who believe they may qualify for a spinal cord stimulator lawsuit can request a free case evaluation. Attorneys handling these claims work on a contingency fee basis, meaning there are no upfront costs and fees are only collected if compensation is recovered.

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