Outcomes of bellwether cases related to inferior vena cava filters in multidistrict litigations

In the present study, we identified and reviewed the outcomes of bellwether cases related to inferior vena cava (IVC) filter multidistrict litigations (MDLs).

The legal research database, LexisNexis (New York, NY), was used to identify all cases related to IVC filters. Cases unrelated to the MDLs were excluded. Court documents recording the proceedings for bellwether cases sent to jury trials were retrieved from the LexisNexis subsidiary, Law360. Data on plaintiffs, filter models, reported complications, filed claims, decision-making body, verdicts, and rewards were reviewed.

A total of 678 cases pertaining to IVC filters were found in the database, of which 12 were identified as bellwether cases for MDL. Of the 12, 2 (16.7%) were initially ruled in favor of the plaintiffs in jury trials, although the judgment for 1 of these was later vacated by a judge. The remaining 10 (83.3%) had been decided in favor of the manufacturers by judges and juries.

Verdicts in all bench trials were in favor of manufacturers, suggesting that judges perceived the presented complications by patients to be within the normal realm of the expected risk of IVC filter use. The findings from the present study have emphasized the treating physicians' legal responsibility to adequately warn patients of all the associated risks with IVC filters. The findings have also indicated that physicians can still be found liable in product liability cases directed at manufacturers. Physicians should continue to actively monitor patients to optimize the IVC retrieval windows.