When you fall ill, it is natural that you put your trust in the medical team caring for you and the medication(s) that they recommend. However, there are times when the drugs you are given end up affecting and hurting you in ways that they were not supposed to.
Medications like Taxotere and other chemotherapy drugs are created with the objective of helping cancer patients heal and overcome their illness. Yet, these drugs have instead caused much pain and suffering in the lives of breast cancer survivors, causing them to suffer from excessive tearing of the eyes or even permanent closure of the tear ducts which leads to bigger health issues.
When this happens, pharmaceutical companies break the trust of their patients and often act illegally in an attempt to avoid paying out damages to victims. You – the patient – have the right to seek out the justice and compensation that you deserve.
But in order to do that, you will need a qualified product liability lawyer.
What is a product liability case?
In the U.S., there are laws in place that are meant to protect consumers from faulty products. When an individual purchases a product, they expect it to do something specific, like help heal them. The product is also purchased under the notion that it is safe to use.
A product liability suit can be brought to the manufacturer or creator if the product infringes on any of the aforementioned expectations.
When involved in a product liability case, there are some important terms to know:
- Warranty.What the product is promising the consumer. If the product is incapable of fulfilling such promise, you may have a product liability case on your hands.
- Negligence. The legal doctrine which states a company or manufacturer is liable for preventable incidents that could have been foreseen.
- Strict Liability. The legal doctrine which states a company or manufacturer is accountable when the consumer is injured due to a faulty product, regardless of whether the defect was their fault or not.
Due to the wide variety of products, product liability cases are divided by the type of the product which caused the damage. That is why it is very important to choose an appropriate product liability lawyer.
What To Look For in a Product Liability Lawyer
Choosing the right product liability lawyer to properly handle your case can be a challenge that requires plenty of research. Here is some information to look for and ask when first meeting with a product liability lawyer:
-
- Look for recommendations.
Ask your friends if they know a lawyer. Even if this lawyer is not familiar with product liability, or does not offer the services you need, they may be able to refer you to a lawyer who can properly aid you. The Internet has also made research easier by providing you with plenty of online resources and reviews from real clients.
-
- Use the free first consultations.
Many lawyers offer a free consultation. Make use of these so that you can analyze your case with a lawyer and to see whether or not you will be comfortable with them. You should also use this opportunity as a chance to ask as many questions as needed before committing.
-
- Find out what their specialization is.
Make sure the lawyer specializes in the right type of product. If you are suing a pharmaceutical manufacturer, you will want a lawyer who has a background in pharmaceutical lawsuits.
The following are some of the different types of specializations:
-
-
- Medications/pharmaceutical
- Medical devices
- Automotive product defects
- Food
- Furniture
- Home appliances
- Toys
- Where did they study?
-
Make sure to learn about the lawyer’s background as much as possible. Being aware of any special programs or educational experiences that helped them grow as a professional can help you make a better decision.
-
- Success rate and trial record.
How many times have they successfully obtained compensation for their clients? It is highly recommended that you ask for their trial record; there are cases which can only be settled in court. Knowing if a lawyer has won most of these types of cases highlights their competency and can put you at ease.
Types of Compensation
The types of compensation you receive and how much it will be, depends on the details of your case. Some product liability cases are repetitive and both sides of the incident know the issues and can come to an agreement quickly.
However, it is important to recognize that the amount you receive will vary from case to case. Likewise, the state of Texas places limits on the amount of damages that can be received in certain instances.
Some of the types of compensation you may be eligible to receive include but are not limited to:
- Economic damages. This refers to the amount of money spent or lost as a result of the product’s damages to you. This can include medical bills, lost income, and more.
- Non-economic damage. This refers to any physical, mental, or emotional damages suffered by the victim and caused by the responsible party (i.e. the pharmaceutical company). There is no cap for non-economic damages in Texas. However, this kind of compensation can be hard to calculate due to its subjective nature. The jury defines the amount.
- Punitive damage. This type of compensation is only awarded if it is possible to prove malice, fraud, or gross negligence. This would be an additional economic punishment to the company or manufacturer due to their reckless behavior. It is only awarded if the previous two are awarded as well. Punitive damages are capped at the greater of $200,000, or twice the economic damages, plus non-economic damages up to $750,000.
Medications are meant to help you or your loved ones. You have the right to search for help and protection to get the justice and recovery you are entitled to.
If you or a loved one has taken Taxotere or any another chemotherapy drug and are now struggling with eye-related complications, contact the qualified and experienced product liability lawyers at Hotze Runkle PLLC today.
The product liability lawyers at Hotze Runkle PLLC are leading the way when it comes to fighting for the rights of cancer patients and survivors who have been hurt by chemotherapy drug manufacturers. Several chemotherapy drugs used during treatment – including Taxotere – have been shown to cause permanent closure of a patient’s tear ducts as well as excessive tearing. These issues, in turn, lead to other eye-related complications that can cause substantial amounts of damage and pain.
But you don’t have to accept the illegal behavior of these pharmaceutical companies. Find comfort in knowing that there is a team of dedicated lawyers ready to protect your rights. You don’t have to go up against these pharmaceutical giants alone; the attorneys at Hotze Runkle PLLC have the experience, skill, and determination to help you piece your life back together.
If you believe you have been the victim of chemo-related tearing and permanently shut tear ducts, then please consider the following information.
Chemotherapy Drugs and Your Eyes
There are a number of drugs used to treat cancer which can affect a patient’s eyes and eyesight. While the effects are generally temporary, in some cases these effects can lead to long-term health issues.
These effects are most likely to occur with chemotherapy drugs and can include:
- Blurred or dulled vision
- Clouding of the lens of the eye
- Loss of areas of vision
- Headaches
- Sensitivity to light
- Eye infections
- Dry eyes
- Swollen eyelids
- Excessive tearing
At Hotze Runkle PLLC, we have been closely monitoring chemotherapy drugs linked to excessive tearing and have noted a few including:
- Taxotere (docetaxel)
- Xeloda (capecitabine)
- Cytarabine
- Adriamycin (doxorubicin)
- Fluorouracil
Excessive tearing – known medically as epiphora – can occur when there is a blockage in the drainage system of the eye due to the swelling of nearby tissues.
About Epiphora (Excessive Tearing)
Epiphora can affect patients in two primary ways: either by an overproduction of tears and mucus or by preventing the proper draining of tears through the lacrimal apparatus, which is the system of ducts and sacs that create the tears and then moves them out through the nasal cavity.
The obstruction of these ducts can occur as the result of an infection, inflammatory disorder, physical trauma, or surgery. In some cases, bacteria can also cause infection and blockage of these ducts.
When the tear ducts are blocked, tears begin to build up in the tear sac and can increase the risk of infection that can lead to inflammation next to the eye. Depending on the case, blocked tear ducts can also cause scarring.
Treatment for excessive tearing depends on the severity of the problem as well as the cause. One of the most commonly recommended treatments is a surgical procedure known as dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR).
About Dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR) & Potential Complications
DCR is a procedure used to treat blockage in the tear ducts. The surgery can be performed under general or local anesthesia depending on the patient’s or surgeon’s choice. The goal of the operation is to create a small incision in the blocked tear duct in order to allow tears to drain directly into the nasal cavity. To keep the incision open, the surgeon may use stents or tubes known as Lester Jones tubes.
As with any procedure, there are a number of complications and risks that patients should be aware of including:
- Infection
- Swelling and bruising
- Excessive bleeding
- Scarring or fused tissue within the nose
- Bleeding within the orbital cavity
- Dry eye
- Persistent pain at the surgical site
- Facial scarring
- Injury to an eye muscle which can result in vision problems or loss
- If stents or Jones tubes are used, prolapse of the stent can occur
In cases where stents are used, soft tissue infections can occur as well as migration of the Jones tube which can require additional surgeries. Complications can be affected by the patient’s health, age, the type of DCR being performed, and the reason for it.
Duct-related surgery is not always ideal for patients, and thus victims dealing with excessive tearing caused by chemotherapy medications like Taxotere can end up dealing with additional complications that the drug manufacturers did not warn them about.
Do not hesitate to contact the product liability lawyers at Hotze Runkle PLLC if you or a loved one is suffering from eye-related complications as result of chemotherapy drugs such as Taxotere.
Taxotere is a chemotherapy drug used for the treatment of breast cancer, advanced stomach cancer, head/neck cancer, prostate cancer, and lung cancer. The drug is traditionally given in liquid form through an IV. There are several factors that affect dosage including weight and height, general health, other diseases and health issues, as well as the type of cancer that is being treated.
Like any other chemotherapy drug, there are a number of serious side effects that can prove to be truly disastrous to a patient’s health and wellbeing. Our product liability lawyers at Hotze Runkle PLLC want to inform you about these potential issues and how they can affect your life.
Chemotherapy Drug Side Effects
Most chemotherapy drug side effects are limited to the duration of the chemotherapy process and are eventually filtered through the body. They are also predictable in terms of how long they last.
Some of the most common side effects, experienced by more than 30% of chemotherapy drug users, include:
| Nausea | Diarrhea | Vomiting | Temporary hair loss |
| Tiredness | Increased susceptibility to infections | Changes to nail color/nail falling off | Missed menstrual cycles |
| Numb fingers and toes | Fluid retention | Constipation | Anemia or low white blood cell count |
Some side effects will end abruptly following the conclusion of treatment while others are prolonged. The duration a patient may suffer from these after-effects can be affected by their overall health.
Keep in mind that these side effects do not affect everyone and may vary from patient to patient.
While taking Taxotere, individuals may experience allergic reactions such as hives, tightness in their throat, an inability to breath, face, lip, tongue, or throat swelling. If you suffer from any of these side effects you should consult your doctor immediately.
You may also experience inflammation, redness, and dryness of the skin around the entry site. These reactions are more likely to occur during the actual treatment.
Major Side Effects
Some of the more serious side effects of chemotherapy drugs are:
- Swelling of the hands/feet/legs
- Unexplained weight gain
- Numbness or tingling of the hands or feet
- Muscle or joint pain
- Persistent weakness or fatigue
- Eye pain
- Irregular heartbeat
- Severe stomach pain
- Black or bloody stools
- Severe headaches
- Vision changes
- Chest pain
Excessive Tearing
Another major side effect of chemotherapy drugs is epiphora – also known as excessive tearing.
Excessive tearing is caused by the obstruction of the nasolacrimal duct that connects the eye socket to the nasal cavity. The source of this excessive tearing stems from the tear duct becoming infected and inflamed, leading to tears welling up in the eye and falling excessively.
Excessive tearing can lead to difficulty reading, driving, issues with eyesight, and can negatively affect a patient’s quality of life.
Treatment of this side effect depends on how severe the problem is. In mild cases, the doctor may just monitor the patient’s health to ensure that no major damage is caused. In severe cases, surgery may be encouraged.
The surgical procedure to create a new channel from the tear sac to the inside of the nose is known as dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR). This surgery is intended to allow the tears to bypass the blocked duct and work correctly.
However, there are a number of risks associated with the DCR procedure including:
- Excessive bleeding
- Prominent facial scars
- Infection
- Displaced stent that can lead to other eye-related issues
- Abnormally fused tissue in the nose
- Non-effective procedure
- Blindness may occur with damage to the infraorbital vessels or optic nerve
These risks differ according to things such as age, health conditions, and the reasons for the procedure.
Before Using Taxotere
Your doctor should be made aware of any other prescriptions or over the counter medications that you are taking including vitamins and dietary supplements. During chemotherapy, there will be physical changes and imbalances throughout your body.
All physical symptoms should be reported to your doctor immediately. Even though some side effects are temporary they could potentially lead to much more serious problems.
If you were, or are, undergoing chemotherapy and have suffered from excessive tearing, contact the product liability attorneys at Hotze Runkle PLLC today at (512) 476-7771 or (877) 919-0830 to schedule your consultation.
Your product liability lawyers at Hotze Runkle PLLC have been following the news regarding chemotherapy drugs that cause excessive tearing. Several drugs used during the course of chemotherapy treatment have been shown to cause permanent closure of a patient’s tear ducts. This, in turn, has lead to patient’s developing a number of eye-related complications such as:
- Severe cases of excessive tearing (epiphora)
- Pain and swelling inside the corner of the eye
- Blurred vision
- Mucus or pus build up and discharge
One of these drugs, known as Taxotere, which is manufactured by the pharmaceutical company, Sanofi, is already facing a mounting number of lawsuits from breast cancer patients and survivors who are dealing with other severe side effects. Breast cancer patients have launched a legal attack on the negligent company claiming they failed to effectively notify users of how severe these side effects could be.
While the national litigation team at Hotze Runkle PLLC is focusing primarily on helping victims of excessive tearing and permanent tear duct closure, we believe that is important to highlight that this is not the first time the manufacturer of Taxotere has wrongly hurt users.
Why People are Filing Taxotere Lawsuits
There are currently over 8,000 pending lawsuits against Taxotere for false marketing and downplaying the severity of its side effects.
One of the most drastic side effects cancer patients have faced has been permanent hair loss. While hair loss is a commonly noted side effect of chemotherapy, in the case of breast cancer patients taking Taxotere, there was an increased risk of chemotherapy-induced alopecia – or permanent hair loss. For most patients, hair usually begins to grow back after 3 to 6 months but for some Taxotere users, this permanent loss of hair has lead to truly traumatic experiences.
Having to deal with the physical and psychological pain and suffering of chemotherapy treatment is challenging enough. The breast cancer survivors who have to deal with alopecia have suffered intense damage to their quality of life. Studies have shown that cancer survivors dealing with alopecia often face higher rates of anxiety, poor body image, and lowered self-esteem.
Sadly, these psychological effects make it difficult for survivors to transition back into their everyday lives – and even work.
Warnings about the risk of alopecia were not specified until 2015, nearly 20 years after the chemotherapy drug had been in the market. Unbelievably, the manufacturer knew as early as 1998, when they funded a study that confirmed a potential for permanent hair loss.
Still, the pharmaceutical company failed to warn patients about the findings. In fact, the company marketed the drugs as a safer, more effective alternative to other chemotherapy drugs in the United States. Even with studies and warnings coming in from foreign countries, Sanofi continued to downplay the effects and essentially ignore studies that showed otherwise.
This situation clearly highlights the extent to which pharmaceutical manufacturers such as Sanofi are willing to go to make a profit off the pain of others.
Taxotere and Other Chemotherapy Drugs Under Scrutiny Again
Taxotere already has a history of leaving breast cancer patients struggling with permanent cases of hair loss, and yet the drug continues to be heavily recommended and used. Now, Taxotere and other chemotherapy drugs are being associated with excessive tearing and permanent tear duct closure.
But you don’t have to quietly accept your situation.
The product liability attorneys of Hotze Runkle PLLC are here to make sure that the negligence of Sanofi does not go unpunished. With years of experience in product liability representation, trust in our ability to fight for your civil justice.
Contact our law offices today at (877) 919-0830 to schedule a consultation. At Hotze Runkle PLLC, we don’t demand your trust, we earn it.
The experience of dealing with cancer is frightening enough for those fighting for their lives, but it is an unfortunate reality that survivors may still have to deal with long lasting complications that can arise from treatment.
One of these issues that the personal injury lawyers of Hotze Runkle PLLC have been closely following is related to the chemotherapy drug known as Taxotere. During the course of chemotherapy treatment, the drug causes permanent closure of the patient’s tear ducts. In turn, the patient develops excessive tearing (epiphora), discharge, and other eye-related complications.
While the drug manufacturer, Sanofi, warned of “excessive tearing”, it failed to mention that the closure of the tear ducts and tearing could become permanent. Sadly, breast cancer survivors all across the nation are dealing with these after effects, which are at times made worse by various surgeries intended to resolve the health problems.
If you believe you are the victim of chemo-related tearing and permanently shut tear ducts, know that there is a team of attorneys ready to fight for you. The Hotze Runkle PLLC firm is committed to working on behalf of individuals who have been victimized and hurt by drug manufacturers who put profit before people.
Please consider the following information regarding issues related to blocked tear ducts and the complications that can arise from surgery to correct it.
What to Know About Blocked Tear Ducts
Blocked tear ducts can happen for a number of reasons including age-related changes, infection in the eyes, tear drainage system and/or nose, trauma, or – in the situation of the Taxotere victims – as a side effect of chemotherapy medication.
It is vital that individuals dealing with a blocked tear duct understand the symptoms associated with the condition. Catching the following signs early can help prevent further damage:
- Excessive tearing
- Recurring inflammation and infection
- Pain and swelling in the inside corner of the eye
- Long lasting redness
- Crusting of the eyelids
- Blurred vision
- Mucus or pus buildup and discharge
- Bloody tears
Because the patient’s tears are not draining properly, they remain in the tear duct drainage system. This leads to the growth of bacteria, viruses, and fungi within the tear drainage system and the clear membrane over your eye surface, which can in turn lead to inflammation or infections that require prompt medical attention and treatment.
Issues Arising From Tear Duct-Related Surgery and Jones Tubes
One of the recommendations often made to help ease the issues associated with a blocked tear duct is a delicate procedure. For individuals who undergo this surgery, surgeons experienced in lacrimal surgery (i.e. surgeons that know how to operate on tear ducts) place a thin tube of toughened glass that runs from their eye, near the blocked tear ducts, to the inside of the nose. These tubes are known as Lester Jones tubes, permanent, and are designed to drain the tears from the eyes through the nose.
Unfortunately, the Jones tubes are prone to issues. Problems associated with Lester Jones tubes include:
- Dislodgement: The tube can shift within the eye and come out partially or even completely. This can require a trip to the hospital and surgery.
- Blockage of the tube: The tube can become coated with protein, mucus, and other substances that stop the flow of tears along the tube. When this occurs, a new tube is generally required.
- Inflammation: The tubes can shift into lower levels of tissues and become inflamed masses.
- Pain: Patients have reported eye pain as air pushes through the small openings in the tubes or as the tubes migrate and begin to push against portions of the nasal system.
This “solution” is not always ideal for patients, and thus victims of chemotherapy medications like Taxotere deal with additional complications that the manufacturing company failed to warn them of.
If you or your loved ones have suffered health complications as result of chemotherapy drugs, do not hesitate to seek out legal support to obtain the care and guidance of the experienced product liability lawyers at Hotze Runkle PLLC.
Contact us today at (512) 476-7771 or (877) 919-0830 to schedule a consultation. At Hotze Runkle PLLC, we don’t demand your trust, we earn it.
Years of product complications and mounting litigation have left an unflattering brand on IVC filters. Patients continue to experience problems with the troublesome medical devices.
Part of what our national litigation team at Hotze Runkle PLLC has learned in dealing with the patients affected by IVC filters is that there is often as much trouble with removing these products as there is living with them.
The reasons to consider removal are often the same ones that make extracting an IVC filter so difficult. Whether the filter has torn or blocked a vein, or pieces of the metallic devices have traveled elsewhere, safely removing an IVC filter can be a dangerous undertaking.
Luckily, recent breakthroughs in IVC filter removal look promising for patients living with the pains and medical concerns caused by the devices.
Cutting-Edge Innovations
The fact that these filters break down and inevitably require removal should not be all that surprising. Filters of all sorts need to be replaced in order to prevent potential issues.
What is alarming is that follow-ups to determine the status of IVC filters are not always done, even with the knowledge that most complications arise within three to six months.
[bctt tweet=”#IVC filter complications can begin in as little as 3 to 6 months #Fact” username=””]
This urgent need is what motivated a team of interventional radiologists at Rush University Medical Center to develop a safe and effective method of removing the filters.
The Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology published the latest techniques developed by the team in November of last year.
Lead author Osman Ahmed, MD, reflected the confidence of the interventional radiologists involved when he stated that they were able to remove any filter with this new method, regardless of the situation.
This innovative system for IVC filter removal centers around catching – or “snaring” – the device during a procedure to ensure that it doesn’t move. This minimizes the chance that additional damage is done to the vein.
Once this is done, the doctors cover the device so that no pieces break off and travel elsewhere in a patient’s body.
An excimer laser is one of the tools utilized by the team to make this technique possible. These lasers are commonly used in the production of microelectronics and eye surgery.
The confidence put forth by Ahmed is well-founded as the Rush staff has successfully retrieved 100 percent of IVC filters with their methods over the last five years.
[bctt tweet=”#RushUMC has 100% #IVCfilter removal rate with new method over last 5 yrs” username=””]
Making a Difference Where It Really Matters
While skeptics may be quick to wonder if these are primarily standard procedures, this is not the case.
Many of these procedures were performed on referred patients that required the team to deal with filters that other hospitals had deemed too difficult to remove.
Twilight (conscious) sedation is typically used for these minimally invasive outpatient procedures. If the Rush staff feel that a retrieval may take longer, a patient is given general anesthesia.
The incision made for removing an IVC filter is made either in the neck or the groin. The team uses X-rays to guide the tools they use, such as wires and catheters, to remove a filter.
The necessity to remove IVC filters is because of the inherent dangers associated with leaving the devices inside a patient’s body for too long. The FDA recommends that everyone who has an IVC filter should consult with an interventional radiologist about removing the filter. Regardless of whether removal is recommended, all patients should be evaluated.
[bctt tweet=” #FDA says the length of time left implanted may increase IVC filter complication risks #HotzeRunkle” username=””]
If you or someone you know has been harmed by complications with an IVC filter, contact the national litigation team of Hotze Runkle PLLC today at 877-919-0830.
Our experienced legal team can help you determine if you are entitled to compensation for the suffering you have experienced.
Don’t let your voice be taken away. We will take care of you and your family by holding those who failed to, accountable.
The majority of makers and distributors of IVC filters across the country find themselves entangled in litigation.
These widely-used devices, which are typically used to treat and prevent deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and pulmonary embolisms, have a long-standing reputation for being dangerous and harmful to patients who have had them implanted.
Strangely, these companies have still persist in marketing and selling their products. Even in the face of countless reports of injuries, complications – and even death.
Hotze Runkle PLLC knows that these companies have to be held accountable for the suffering they have caused. Their disregard for the wellbeing of patients is both inhumane and criminal.
People should know that even though IVC filters are a common choice to combat DVT and pulmonary embolisms, there are other treatment options available to them.
Potential Alternatives to IVC Filters
Anticoagulants
This is the alternative choice that is most commonly used instead of an IVC Filter. Anticoagulants, or blood thinners, can be given to post-surgery patients to help minimize the risk of strokes and blood clots.
A typical blood thinner therapy plan begins with a patient being given heparin for several days. This will be accompanied by the start of a warfarin treatment that can last anywhere between three to six months.
The reason that these plans begin with heparin is that warfarin usually needs a number of days to reach its peak effectiveness. Heparin helps bridge that initial time gap between surgery and when warfarin reaches its full potency.
However, this alternative is not without drawbacks of its own. People who have medical issues that make them more likely to have severe bleeding incidents can’t take anticoagulants.
Patients with kidney problems and clotting disorders are among those who have https://www.doctorsexpresswaltham.com/buy-diflucan/ to seek out additional treatment avenues as well.
Additionally, if the threat of DVT or pulmonary embolisms is a recurring issue, there is no definite timetable for how long a patient would have to use blood thinners.
Over time, these medications can cause scarring in a patient’s veins and potentially increase the risk of blood clots.
Intermittent Pneumatic Compression (IPC)
If circumstances and medical status prevent the use of blood thinners, a person might consider IPC treatment. In spite of the complex name, this is a relatively simple treatment method.
A patient will have an inflatable sleeve placed over the part of the body where there is risk of blood clots – often times the leg – but not always. That sleeve is connected to an air pump.
The air inflates the sleeve which in turn pushes the blood away from the trouble area to the patient’s heart. When the sleeve deflates, it allows for blood to return to where it started.
The continual process helps facilitate regular blood circulation, minimizing the likelihood of a clot forming.
Thrombolysis & Surgery
These two choices are not used as frequently but should be weighed if a patient is not a candidate for or comfortable with other treatment options.
Thrombolysis is a procedure that involves the use of a catheter to quickly break up a clot and return a vein’s blood flow to normal. There is a relatively high success rate (80%) associated with this type of treatment.
Occasionally, surgery can be employed as a solution to a blood clot. This is only done in very rare and unusual cases involving clots that are very large and blocking important blood vessels.
If you or someone you know has suffered from an implanted IVC filter, Hotze Runkle PLLC wants you to know what your legal options are.
As with all medical decisions, Hotze Runkle PLLC encourages you to speak with your physician when deciding on how to face issues with DVT or pulmonary embolisms. It is vital that you consider all the alternatives to IVC filters.
Our experienced team of attorneys can help you in your fight against the companies who made your well-being secondary to their bottom line. Contact our national litigation firm today at (877) 919-0830 and let us take care of you and your family.
Disclaimer: THIS SITE DOES NOT PROVIDE MEDICAL ADVICE. The information presented in this blog and on this site should not be interpreted as a substitute for qualified professional medical advice.
While we can sympathize and empathize with the victims who have suffered adverse effects because of the use of IVC filters, the negligent companies behind them seem faceless and nameless.
The national litigation team at Hotze Runkle PLLC understands the importance of getting to know the people we are fighting for on a personal level. We also believe it is equally important for us to know about the reckless companies who have put these innocent people in harm’s way by disregarding data that showed their products were dangerous.
By the Names and Numbers
In deciding whether or not to pursue legal action for an injustice suffered, it is natural to ask if there is any precedent or history of similar cases.
For patients who have had trouble with IVC filters, there is an ever-growing body of cases to draw on. There are almost 4000 filed lawsuits currently pending in two separate federal litigations against the two largest makers of these devices.
[bctt tweet=”Nearly 4000 lawsuits against 2 largest IVC makers #HotzeRunkle #NationalLitigation #Fighting4You” username=””]
However, these two makers – Cook Medical and C.R. Bard – are not alone in facing potential legal consequences.
Cordis Corporation, a smaller company that also produces the filters, is also involved in around 200 cases of their own. Rex Medical, B. Braun, and Argon Medical are additional companies that distribute IVC filters who are facing lawsuits in federal and state court over the side effects associated with their products.
Still, none of the companies face more penalties and consequences than Cook Medical. The Gunther Tulip and Celect IVC models they market are at the heart of many of the claims levied against them.
The U.S. District Court, Southern District of Indiana, is currently handling all the pretrial steps for the multidistrict litigation on these cases.
C.R. Bard has a number of its models that have had injury claims directed against them. The hundreds of lawsuits focus on issues that have arisen with their Denali, Recovery, G2, and Meridian models.
The OptEase and TrapEase filters are the products that have brought suits against Cordis Corporation.
The Role of the FDA
Compounding the indifference from the distributors of IVC filters was the slow response from the FDA. Even after having received reports, in the thousands, for years concerning the negative and deadly effects of the filters, they didn’t issue a warning against them until 2010.
A subsequent warning from the FDA in 2014 advised the removal of IVC filters after a month or two followed their initial warning.
A year later, NBC followed up with a report of their own claiming that C.R. Bard had disregarded these warnings and continued to sell their products, in spite of the injuries and death associated with them.
The events covered in the report highlighted many of the common issues faced by patients who had, for various medical reasons, the devices implanted. These risks included the IVC filters puncturing the vena cava and breaking apart and moving out of place.
In some cases, the metal pieces that broke off traveled to other parts of the body, like the heart and lungs.
C.R. Bard failed to respond to these issues and also failed to pass the warnings along to doctors.
Hotze Runkle PLLC’s national litigation firm is here to provide you with the legal guidance you need and to fight for the justice you deserve.
Regardless of whether or not the IVC filter model that you have had implanted appears above, there is a high risk of harm that comes with any version of them.
We here at Hotze Runkle PLLC advise you to speak with your doctor or qualified physician on the potential risks you could face while using an IVC filter if you haven’t already struggled with their dangerous failures.
If you or someone you know has been injured because of their use of an IVC filter, contact Hotze Runkle PLLC today at (877) 919-0830.
Don’t suffer quietly or alone. These companies must be held responsible for the pain they have caused innocent victims.
There has been increased momentum in the Taxotere lawsuits that are currently undergoing discovery and various pretrial steps in the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana.
Altogether, there are now over 1,100 suits filed by breast cancer patients who have experienced permanent alopecia (hair loss) as a result of taking the chemotherapy drug Taxotere.
[bctt tweet=”Over 1000 lawsuits filed against chemotherapy drug #Taxotere have been filed #HotzeRunkle #LawTeam” username=””]
One factor that has contributed to this high number of cases is that lawsuits involving both Taxotere (docetaxel) and its generic versions are included in the consolidated litigation.
Hotze Runkle PLLC recognizes the importance of the path these proceedings will take. It is vital to future cases and to the lives of affected patients that the manufacturer of Taxotere, Sanofi-Aventis, be required to answer for the suffering they have caused.
Looking Back as Things Move Forward
There is a monthly status conference scheduled for July 7th, which should provide more concrete dates for the trials moving forward.
Perhaps the most promising news that has come out of pretrial developments is that a request by Sanofi-Aventis lawyers to have the suits litigated on an individual basis was not approved.
The request came in spite of years of data showing a repeated pattern of Sanofi-Aventis ignoring the potential of long-term hair loss in patients treated with Taxotere.
In 2012, in the Annals of Oncology, a study was done on 20 patients who were treated with Taxotere during their therapy. Every patient in the study experienced a lasting alopecia.
While that may be an extreme example, a study conducted by Sanofi itself showed the same risks for Taxotere users as far back as the late 1990s.
This study, known as GEICAM 9805, yielded results that showed nine percent of patients who were given Taxotere were afflicted with hair loss that lasted ten years or more.
Those chronic side effects were still not enough for Sanofi-Aventis to provide more than a vague warning concerning hair loss on Taxotere packaging.
In some cases, the alopecia experienced by patients in this study was not restricted to just the scalp. The loss of eyebrows was another long-term consequence for at least one woman in Canada.
[bctt tweet=”#Alopecia (hair loss) can affect more than just the #scalp. #HotzeRunkle #Facts” username=””]
One case that comes up most often is the lawsuit filed by Ami Dodson.
A former breast cancer patient from California who used the drug during her chemotherapy treatment has made a number of allegations against the defendants, concerning events that go as far back as 1996 – over 20 years ago.
The fact that the timeline of her claims stretches back to this year is no accident. It was in 1996 that docetaxel was first approved by the FDA for use in breast cancer therapy.
Dodson was one of the earliest to voice opposition to Sanofi’s marketing of Taxotere as more effective and less toxic in comparison to other chemotherapy drugs. Her suit is something of a template case illustrating how the potential side effects of Taxotere have resulted in lasting, chronic hair loss.
Mrs. Dodson’s case, as well as all those currently pending in Louisiana, should serve as a reminder to all those affected by Taxotere that they don’t have to remain silent.
The national litigation team of Hotze Runkle PLLC is here to help you figure out the legal rights and options that you have.
You can fight back against the negligence and indifference of Sanofi-Aventis and get justice for your troubles.
The time to act is now. Contact our national litigation team today at 512-476-7771 and let us go to work for you. We want to bring you the peace of mind you need to move forward in life.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has received more than 1,000 adverse event reports involving Inferior Vena Cava (IVC) filters and a growing number of lawsuits are being filed against IVC manufacturers BARD and Cook Medical for several of their products including Bard Recovery, Bard G2, Bard G2 Express, Cook Gunther Tulip, and Cook Celect.
Allegations against the developers of these IVC filters revolve around the medical devices falling out of place or breaking apart within the body, and the fragments migrating, causing severe internal damages to vein walls and internal organs such as the heart and lungs. Lawsuits also note that the manufacturers failed to warn patients and physicians about the potential hazards of IVC filters.
These issues have been linked to retrievable IVC filters and their surgical removal has been a topic surrounded by much controversy. In 2014, the FDA released a safety communication notifying doctors to remove retrievable IVC filters within two months after a patient was no longer at risk of pulmonary embolism; a medical condition the devices are designed to protect against.
Now, a new study published in Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions found that it becomes harder to remove the IVC filters the longer they are left implanted, with this further resulting in health problems and the need for more invasive retrieval techniques.
What we already knew about IVC filters.
This isn’t the first time the failing of IVC filters and their removal – or lack thereof – have been scrutinized by reputable organizations. A study published in 2010 in the Archives of Internal Medicine found that the Bard Recovery Filter had a failure rate set at 25% and the Bard G2 at about 12%.
Additionally, JAMA Internal Medicine published in July 2015, a study conducted at a single medical center which revealed that out of 648 procedures, 14.7% required advanced techniques to retrieve the devices after routine attempts had failed.
These studies have only validated concerns set forth by plaintiffs and those injured by the harmful devices.
What the new study warns against.
The newest study published in Circulation: Cardiovascular Interventions was completed by a group of researchers from Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine. The group analyzed data from IVC filter retrieval procedures that took place between 2009 to 2015.
One of the most notable points of the research was that out of 762 procedures, the most common filter retrieved was of the Cook Celect variety.
The researchers also uncovered an alarmingly high retrieval failure rate of nearly 41% when the devices had been left in patients for over seven months. The failure to properly retrieve the IVC filters also led to an increased risk of other injuries such as groin hematoma or harming of the inferior vena cava itself.
It was understood that the longer the medical device had been left implanted within the patient, the more difficult the retrieval process, which would ultimately require patients to obtain services at a more advanced facility.
What are some of the risk of retrieving IVC filters?
While having the medical devices implanted within the body is risky enough, the removal of IVC filters come with their own potential concerns including:
- Damage to the vena cava
- Damage to internal organs
- Migration of IVC filter pieces to the heart or lungs
- Loss of the filter in the body
- Source of a new clot
In scenarios where patients cannot have their IVC filter removed because of its dangerous proximity to organs or arteries, they must commence a blood thinning treatment – the same type of treatment the IVC filters were meant to help them avoid.
Let the national litigation team of Hotze Runkle PLLC help you take legal action against the manufacturers of defective IVC filters.
If you or a loved one has suffered physical, emotional, and financial complications due to an IVC filter, Hotze Runkle PLLC is here to help. Contact us today at (877) 919-0830.
Our team of experienced and knowledgeable attorneys is dedicated to fighting for the justice you deserve. Allow us to review your experiences and determine if your case qualifies for compensation.