Spinal Cord Stimulator Malpractice Lawsuit Claims Device Left Veteran Partially Paralyzed

Lawsuit against the Department of Veteran Affairs (VA) indicates man walked into the procedure, but left in a wheelchair, unable to walk after the surgery was completed.

An Arizona man has filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against the U.S. government, claiming he was implanted with a spinal cord stimulator during a VA clinical study, which caused him to lose his ability to walk and control his bladder.

The complaint (PDF) was brought by Christopher Thomas on May 20 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona, naming the United States of America as defendant, as the study was conducted by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA).

Thomas claims VA personnel failed to properly respond to signs that he had suffered a spinal injury and advised him against removing the implant even as his symptoms worsened. He also alleges VA officials later determined he should never have been enrolled in the study, which he says left him with permanent injuries.

Spinal Cord Stimulator Complications

Spinal cord stimulators are sold by several medical device manufacturers, including Abbott Laboratories, Boston Scientific and Medtronic, among others. Each system includes a small, battery-powered pulse generator placed beneath the skin, which is attached to thin electrodes positioned near the spinal cord, and a remote control that allows adjustment of stimulation levels.

Designed to treat chronic pain by disrupting nerve signals to the brain, the implants are meant to be permanent. Therefore, most recipients go through a trial period involving a temporary implant first, to ensure that the permanent device will be effective.

For years, manufacturers have claimed that the implants are safe. However, in recent months, a growing number of patients have filed spinal cord stimulator lawsuits against device manufacturers, alleging that the devices are defectively designed and linked to failures, worsening pain, electric shocks, electrodes protruding from the skin and the need for revision surgery.

Spinal Cord Stimulator Medical Malpractice Lawsuit

Thomas indicates he was invited to participate in a research study by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs in June 2023. He agreed to be a part of the study, which was an attempt to determine the best ways to predict lower back pain and whether that pain is treatable with a spinal cord stimulator.

According to the complaint, Thomas was informed that the study was not designed to provide any direct pain benefits, yet he was told the data could help others, including other veterans, suffering from chronic pain. He underwent implantation in October 2023 at the VA hospital in Tucson, Arizona.

After the surgery, however, Thomas discovered he could no longer walk.

“When Plaintiff awoke in the recovery room immediately after the procedure, Plaintiff complained that he could not feel his legs and was experiencing incontinence. Plaintiff’s left leg began moving involuntarily. Despite Plaintiff’s complaints, Plaintiff was soon thereafter discharged home.”

– Christopher Thomas v. United States of America

Having walked into the facility with no mobility problems, Thomas went home in a wheelchair, unable to walk on his own. Once home, Thomas also discovered that he could not control his bladder, causing him to frequently urinate on himself.

The VA directed him to go to the Emergency Department. However, Thomas states that the study’s principal investigator advised him to leave the spinal cord stimulator in place despite signs of a spinal injury, claiming revision surgery could do more harm than good.

In July 2024, Thomas was diagnosed with myelomalacia, which is a softening of the spine usually caused by low blood supply due to an injury. Treatment of the condition depends heavily on early detection, as the damage is usually irreversible and best caught and treated as early as possible to prevent further deterioration.

The next month, he was referred to the Spinal Cord Injury Clinic, which determined that Thomas had not been a viable candidate for the study. According to his lawsuit, the placement and management of the spinal cord stimulator was done negligently, leading to significant and permanent injuries.

Thomas presents claims of medical negligence, seeking compensatory damages for past and future medical expenses, pain and suffering, emotional distress, loss of enjoyment of life and loss of consortium. The failed implant remains in place.

Spinal Cord Stimulator Consolidation Hearing

Although Thomas’s complaint is a medical malpractice claim, many other spinal cord stimulator injury lawsuits are being pursued as product liability cases brought against the device manufacturers.

Given similar questions of fact and law raised in spinal cord stimulator lawsuits brought throughout the federal court system over the past year, a motion was filed earlier this year seeking to consolidate all cases brought against Abbott and Boston Scientific before one judge, as part of a multidistrict litigation, or MDL.

The U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) heard oral arguments on the spinal cord stimulator lawsuit MDL motion on Thursday at the United States Courthouse and Federal Building in Milwaukee. If the panel agrees with plaintiffs, the lawsuits will be placed before one judge for coordinated discovery and pretrial proceedings, designed to serve the convenience of the parties, witnesses and court.

The appointed judge would likely call on the parties to select several representative cases to serve as potential “bellwether” trials. These early test cases are designed to give the parties an opportunity to see how juries respond to evidence and testimony that would be repeated throughout the litigation, which could help lead to a spinal cord stimulator lawsuit settlement agreement.

However, if no settlement is reached after the bellwether trials and pretrial proceedings, the judge may then remand the cases back to their originating federal districts for individual trial dates.

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