The Bard PowerPort is an implanted port catheter device positioned just beneath the skin to facilitate easy attachment to a catheter for the intravenous administration of fluids or medications. Unfortunately, the Bard PowerPort possesses inherent design and manufacturing flaws, increasing its susceptibility to fracturing and shifting from its intended position. This defect has the potential to result in severe injuries, including internal vascular damage. 

Individuals who have suffered injuries due to a faulty Bard PowerPort device are pursuing product liability lawsuits against the manufacturer responsible for producing these implants. Our law firm is actively receiving cases from individuals who have had a Bard PowerPort catheter device implanted and subsequently experienced injuries resulting from fracture, migration, or other malfunctions of the implant. 

PowerPort Lawsuit News & Updates

The Bard PowerPort litigation continues to evolve with significant updates in early 2025. Plaintiffs and defendants are actively preparing for bellwether trials, as highlighted in a recent Case Management Order requiring the submission of discovery plans. Meanwhile, new cases continue to be filed.  We have almost 900 filed lawsuits.

The rapid growth of the MDL underscores the increasing number of claims related to port catheter failures, a trend mirrored by the creation of a separate MDL for AngioDynamics port catheters.

These updates provides a closer look at the latest developments shaping the trajectory of the litigation.

February 5, 2025 – 8 New Cases in MDL

After a significant increase in prior months, new filings in the PowerPort MDL slowed dramatically in January, with only eight new cases added, bringing the total pending claims to 1,004. Our expectation is that this is a one-off and we will see more failed port-a-cath lawsuits in the next update next month. Our law firm continues to receive calls from individuals just now realizing their injuries may be linked to their PowerPort implant.

January 29, 2025 – New Indiana PowerPort isp M.R.I Implantable Port Lawsuit

There was a new lawsuit filed in the MDL from an Indiana plaintiff last week. Her Bard Powerport was implanted in 2018 and it lead to infection and discitis osteomyelitis. This is a severe spinal infection involving inflammation of the intervertebral discs and adjacent vertebrae, often causing significant pain and potential neurological complications.

January 16, 2025 – Parties to Submit Bellwether Proposals by April 

The judge in the Bard PowerPort MDL has issued a new Case Management Order (CMO No.29). The CMO requires both parties to submit a joint discovery plan for the first group of bellwether pool cases. The plan must be submitted by April 4, 2025. Meanwhile, the parties will be able to take depositions of plaintiffs, family members, and certain medical professionals.

January 3, 2025 – MDL Adds 78 New Cases

The PowerPort MDL started off pretty slow in terms of new cases, but recently it has been very active. Around 400 new cases have been added to the MDL since October, causing the MDL to nearly double in size during the time frame. In December, 78 new cases were added to the PowerPort MDL, bringing the current total up to 891.

December 2, 2024 – Status Conference Memo

Attorneys for both plaintiffs and defendants have submitted a joint memorandum in advance of tomorrow’s Case Management Conference. The memorandum outlines key areas of disagreement regarding discovery deadlines, fact sheets, and deposition schedules.

Plaintiffs are advocating for an extension of the discovery deadline, citing delays attributed to the defense’s handling of critical depositions. The defense, however, contends that plaintiffs have not provided adequate justification for an extension, emphasizing the progress made on fact witness depositions and adherence to prior discovery agreements.

Significant contention remains over Rule 30(b)(6) depositions, with plaintiffs accusing the defense of scheduling delays and defendants disputing the scope of the deposition notices as overly broad. Both sides appear firmly entrenched, setting the stage for a contentious conference.

October 7, 2024 – AngioDynamics Port Catheter MDL Created

A new MDL has been created for consolidated handling of all product liability cases involving port catheter devices manufactured by AngioDynamics. The MDL has been assigned to a judge in the Southern District of California. The AngioDynamics catheter cases are basically mirror images of the Bard PowerPort cases, but with a different manufacturer.

Both port catheter devices are very similar and the lawsuits alleged that they both suffered from the same critical design flaws related to the nature of the plastic material that they are made from. The injuries in the AngioDynamics cases are also the same: fracture, migration, severe infection, and vascular damage.

About the PowerPort 

The Bard PowerPort is a port/catheter system manufactured and designed by Bard Access Systems, Inc., (now a subsidiary of Becton, Dickinson and Company (BD). This PowerPort is fully implantable vascular access catheter designed to facilitate recurrent access to the vascular system for the administration of medications, intravenous fluids, nutrition solutions, and blood products. It is most often used by cancer patients for chemo treatment. 

Specifically engineered to simplify the direct delivery of medications into the patient’s bloodstream, the Bard PowerPort is surgically implanted entirely beneath the skin, remaining in place post-surgery. The PowerPort is composed of two key elements—an injection port and a polyurethane catheter. The system operates by utilizing the injection port’s raised center, or “septum,” for medication delivery via a needle. Subsequently, the medication travels from the port through a small, flexible tube (catheter) inserted into a blood vessel.  

The catheter component of the Bard PowerPort is made with Chronoflex AL, a polyurethane material. Unfortunately, a flaw in the chemical design and manufacturing process of Chronoflex catheters has resulted in the PowerPort exhibiting lower strength and durability than originally intended. These inherent shortcomings render the PowerPort vulnerable to fractures, migrations, and other malfunctions post-implantation. 

Complications Associated with Bard PowerPort Design Flaws

The Bard PowerPort was designed to simplify long-term vascular access for patients undergoing treatments like chemotherapy. But instead of providing a reliable lifeline, its design flaws have left countless patients battling severe complications. These are not just technical failures—they are human tragedies impacting individuals already enduring serious health conditions.

The PowerPort’s defects have resulted in three major types of failures: fractures, migration, and infection. Each of these issues carries devastating consequences, especially for patients whose health is already compromised. When a device meant to help becomes a source of harm, the result is pain, frustration, and often life-threatening complications.

1. Fracture: A Clear Mechanical Failure with Devastating Results

The Bard PowerPort’s catheter tubing, made from Chronoflex AL polyurethane, is prone to brittleness and breakage. Over time, exposure to the body’s natural movements and blood flow stresses the material, leading to fractures. When the device fractures, the results can be catastrophic:

• Thrombosis: Broken fragments in the bloodstream can trigger dangerous blood clots. These clots may lead to pulmonary embolism or even stroke. These are life-threatening conditions that no patient should face due to a faulty device.
• Vascular trauma: Fractured pieces act like sharp projectiles, damaging veins and arteries. This can cause significant pain, swelling, and long-term vascular damage.
• Surgical retrieval: Removing fractured components often requires complex and invasive surgeries. Patients who already face serious medical challenges now have to undergo additional operations, risking further complications.

Fracture cases are particularly compelling in court because the defect’s impact is straightforward to prove. A jury can easily understand how a fractured device caused direct harm. For this reason, fractures represent some of the strongest claims in PowerPort lawsuits.

2. Migration: The Hidden Danger

When parts of the PowerPort shift from their original placement, the consequences are just as serious as fractures. Migration can result from a fractured catheter or from the inherent instability of the device’s design. Patients experiencing migration may suffer:

• Vascular disruption: Migration can tear blood vessels, causing severe pain and swelling. In some cases, this leads to perforations that require emergency surgery.
• Organ damage: Migrated components can end up in critical organs like the lungs or heart, causing irreparable harm.
• Device failure: Migration renders the PowerPort useless, often requiring full replacement through another surgery.

For patients, migration is more than just a malfunction. It can mean additional hospital stays, mounting medical bills, and a loss of trust in the very systems designed to save their lives.

3. Infection: The Most Common Complication

Infections are the most frequently reported issue with Bard PowerPorts, and for good reason. The same material flaws that make the device prone to fracture also create an environment where bacteria can thrive. For patients with weakened immune systems—such as those undergoing chemotherapy—these infections can be deadly.

• Localized infections: These manifest as redness, swelling, and pain around the port site. In severe cases, abscesses may form, requiring surgical drainage or removal of the device.
• Systemic infections: When bacteria spread into the bloodstream, the patient may develop sepsis, a life-threatening condition requiring immediate intensive care.
• Septic thrombophlebitis: This dangerous combination of infection and blood clots can severely compromise a patient’s vascular health.

The emotional toll is profound. Many patients develop infections while in the middle of life-saving treatments, like chemotherapy or dialysis. These are already vulnerable individuals, and an infection means more pain, more medical interventions, and more time away from their families and support systems.

 

A Design That Failed the People Who Needed It Most

The Bard PowerPort was meant to be a trusted tool for patients navigating serious medical conditions. Instead, its design flaws have turned it into a source of additional suffering. Fractures and migrations create mechanical failures that are easy to explain but devastating in their consequences. Infections rob patients of the stability they need to manage their underlying conditions. It is one more awful thing for someone who has already had plently of enough awful.

So for patients already battling cancer, chronic illness, or other serious health problems, these complications are nothing short of a betrayal. They trusted this device to make their lives easier, not harder. They deserved better, and Bard knew better. The evidence is clear: this device was flawed from the start, and patients are paying the price.

The injuries caused by the PowerPort are preventable and should never have happened. Patients deserve answers, accountability, and justice for the harm they have suffered. This is what the lawsuits are about—giving a voice to those who were hurt and ensuring that no one else has to endure these life-altering complications.

How These Injuries Are Caused by the PowerPort 

The manufacturing and design problems with the Bard PowerPort make the device very prone to fracture after being implanted. Fracturing of the port implant can often cause it to migrate from its original implant site and cause serious internal vascular damage. The PowerPort’s design defects also make it prone to a number of other malfunctions.  

Fracture and migration of the PowerPort has led to a variety of very serious injuries including: hemorrhage; cardiac/pericardial tamponade (pressure caused by a collection of blood in the area around the heart); thromboembolism; infection; cardiac arrhythmia; severe and persistent pain; and perforations of tissue, vessels and organs, or the need for additional surgeries to remove the defective device. These complications can cause very serious internal injuries and even death. 

Bard Knew About the PowerPort Problems And Did Nothing 

Shortly following the market release of the PowerPort, Bard started receiving significant volumes of adverse event reports (“AERs”) from healthcare providers, detailing instances of post-implantation fracturing of the PowerPort. Bard also received a considerable number of AERs noting the discovery of internal vasculature perforation linked to the implant. 

Based on these AERs and other information, Bard clearly knew or should have known that the PowerPort exhibited a notably higher failure rate compared to similar products available on the market. Bard should have also recognized that the issues plaguing the PowerPort were tied to flaws inherent in the Chronoflex material utilized in manufacturing the device. Despite being aware of this critical information, Bard neglected to warn consumers about these risks or adopt a different, more dependable material for the device. 

The accumulation of adverse event reports regarding fracturing and internal vasculature perforation associated with the Bard PowerPort should have served as clear indicators prompting Bard to take proactive measures, including adequate consumer warnings and transitioning to a more reliable material. However, Bard’s failure to act upon this knowledge exposed consumers to avoidable risks and perpetuated the persistence of known issues with the device.  

PowerPort Lawsuits 

In recent years, the design flaw in the PowerPort have led to a growing tide of Bard PowerPort lawsuits. These lawsuits have been brought by individuals who underwent Bard PowerPort implantation and subsequently sustained severe injuries following post-implantation fractures or malfunctions. 

The lawsuits target Bard Access Systems Inc., the manufacturer, and its parent company, Beckton Dickinson, in product liability claims. Allegations put forth in these lawsuits assert classic failure to warn claims based on the fact that Bard had prior knowledge of the device’s issues. Furthermore, instead of modifying the PowerPort’s design to enhance safety or adequately cautioning users about associated dangers, Bard continued actively and aggressively promoting the device as safe, despite being cognizant of numerous reports detailing catheter fractures, infections, and other serious injuries. 

Moreover, the legal claims argue that Bard’s warnings suggested that device fracture would only occur if physicians incorrectly placed the device, allowing for “compression or pinch-off.” In reality, however, internal knowledge within Bard indicated that these devices were fracturing and causing severe injuries due to design flaws, manufacturing defects, and insufficient warnings. In essence, Bard’s attempt to shift blame onto doctors for device flaws is contradicted by internal understanding that the defects were inherent in the device itself. 

How Much Are Bard Port Catheter Cases Worth?

It is way too early in this litigation to answer this question with any level of real accuracy. There are so many unknowns and variables that could impact the value of this cases. That being said, if we make assumptions about certain key issues we can provide a reasonable estimate for the settlement value of these cases based on results in other similar cases.

The settlement value of individual port catheter cases will vary depending on the type of injury suffered by the plaintiff. Cases involving vascular damaged caused by a fractured or migrated port cath will have the highest settlement value at $180,000 to $390,000.

The next most valuable cases will be those involving thrombosis (blood clots) or stroke. Although these are obviously serious injuries, they are harder to connect directly to a defective port cath. They will probably have a settlement value of $110,000 to $200,000.

The cases with the lowest settlement value will be those involving infection as the only injury. Not only is the usually the least serious injury, but it can be the most difficult to link to defects in the port cath. These cases will probably be worth $25,000 to $75,000.

Are You Eligible to File a Bard PowerPort Lawsuit? 

You may be eligible to file a Bard PowerPort lawsuit and seek financial compensation if you meet the following criteria: 

1. You had a PowerPort catheter device implanted 

1. After implantation your Bard PowerPort fractured, migrated, or otherwise malfunctioned 

1. You suffered serious physical injuries as a direct result of the problems experienced with your PowerPort implant 

Some of the more common injuries related to failure or malfunction of the Bard PowerPort implant are: 

• Infection related to the PowerPort 
• Hemorrhaging  
• Cardiac problems 
• Deep Vein Thrombosis (DVT) 
• Perforation of veins or other tissue by the PowerPort 

Contact Us About a Bard PowerPort Lawsuit 

Our firm is currently accepting new cases from individuals who were injured by a defective Bard PowerPort implant. Contact us today at 888-322-3010 on contact us online for a free consultation.