The vena cava filter has established itself as an essential weapon in the therapeutic arsenal against thromboembolic events. However, the lawsuit regarding IVC filter warns us of possible medical contradiction. The use of vena cava filters implies a multidisciplinary discussion. You must take into account the recognized indications and the risks associated with this procedure.
What is the disease?
Venous thromboembolic disease is a major public health problem, the treatment of which largely depends on therapeutic anticoagulation. The debate over the exact indications and the right timing for implantation and removal is a reality in medical, surgical and intensive care units alike. When there are complications related to anticoagulation, the solution offered by vena cava filters often prevents the occurrence of pulmonary embolism.
What do we know about IVC filter lawsuits?
Do you know the key legal issues regarding IVC filter contradictions in the body? If an IVC filter breaks and the metals fragments move in the body through veins, it damages other organs, such as damaging the heart, lungs and causing internal bleeding.
There are arguments that advocate the allegations on top manufacturers of IVC filter for fabricating investigation results. There are evidences of mismatching data, and forceful FDA approval. Yes, besides being such a remarkable discovery in medical niche, IVC filters have drawbacks.
If you or any of your family members, friends, colleagues, relatives, have installed IVC filter, and come to know that it breaks inside your body, be careful. Go and seek medical help. Along with it, you must get in touch with IVC filter attorneys as soon as possible to claim your rights.
When it came to use?
The use of vena cava filters, initially developed in the 1960, now represents a therapeutic alternative during thromboembolic events. Their efficacy in protecting against pulmonary embolism seems evident in patients with acute thromboembolic disease and unable to receive anticoagulation. The filters currently most used are the so-called “optional” filters.
Keep yourself informed. Ask your doctor before implementing this device. What should you do if a medical emergency arises? What will be your rights? Are you eligible for compensations?
Types of filters: permanent, temporary and optional
First, permanent filters are implanted definitively, generally used during an acute thromboembolic event in patients with a permanent contraindication to anticoagulation. Note that the presence of the long-term filter does not motivate anticoagulation, and it is entirely possible to consider leaving a filter in place without anticoagulant.
Then the temporary filters are implanted with a removal system in the skin. This type of filter is no longer present today. It has a high risk of infection and thrombosis requires mandatory removal within seven days.
The optional filters can function as both permanent and temporary filters (withdrawal possible up to six to twelve weeks depending on the filters). In general, we recommend removing the filter as soon as possible, as the rate of complications and failed removals increases over time.
Note that it is always possible to discuss filter removal with the interventional radiologist if the official deadline has already expired, sometimes up to three to six months after implantation.