People's Justice is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice.
Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
Do You Qualify?
Eligibility Checklist
- Received a Bard PowerPort implantable port catheter
- Experienced catheter fracture confirmed by imaging (X-ray, CT, fluoroscopy)
- Experienced catheter fragment migration or embolism
- Suffered sepsis, endocarditis, or bloodstream infection linked to catheter fracture
- Suffered cardiac or pulmonary complications (perforation, tamponade, pulmonary embolism) linked to catheter
- Underwent surgical or catheter-based retrieval of a fractured PowerPort fragment
- Family member died from complications of a fractured PowerPort catheter (wrongful death)
- Injury occurred within the applicable statute of limitations (discovery rule applies)
How Bard PowerPort Catheters Cause Harm
In Plain Language
Bard PowerPort implanted port catheters, widely used to deliver chemotherapy and other intravenous therapies, have been linked to serious injuries resulting from catheter fracture, migration, and failure. The devices use Chronoflex polyurethane — a material documented to degrade over time inside the body — placing patients at risk of life-threatening complications.
Catheter Fracture from Polyurethane Degradation
Bard's PowerPort catheters are manufactured with Chronoflex AL polyurethane, a material susceptible to environmental stress cracking and oxidative degradation when exposed to bodily fluids over time. As the polymer weakens, micro-cracks form and propagate, eventually causing the catheter to fracture. Fragmented catheter pieces can then travel freely through the bloodstream.
Tip Embolism to the Heart and Lungs
When a fractured catheter segment enters the vascular system, it becomes an embolus — a foreign body migrating through the venous circulation. These fragments frequently lodge in the right side of the heart or pulmonary arteries, causing cardiac arrhythmia, pulmonary embolism, perforation, or cardiac tamponade. Retrieval often requires emergency interventional radiology or open-heart surgery.
Port Body Mechanical Failure
The titanium port reservoir and its connection to the catheter can fail due to design deficiencies, manufacturing defects, or improper seating of the catheter hub. Separation at the port-catheter junction allows infused medications to extravasate into surrounding tissue rather than entering the bloodstream, potentially causing severe chemical burns and necrosis in the chest wall.
Catheter-Associated Thrombosis
The catheter's surface and its positioning in the superior vena cava can trigger the body's clotting cascade, leading to catheter-associated deep vein thrombosis (DVT). Thrombi can partially or fully occlude the catheter lumen, render the port non-functional, and — if they dislodge — travel to the lungs and cause pulmonary embolism. Cancer patients on chemotherapy face elevated baseline clotting risk, compounding the danger.
Catheter-Related Bloodstream Infection (CRBSI)
Implanted ports provide a direct pathway for bacteria to enter the bloodstream. When the catheter material degrades or the port septum is accessed repeatedly, biofilm formation on the catheter surface can seed systemic infection. Catheter-related bloodstream infections (CRBSIs) can progress to sepsis and septic shock, conditions that are particularly dangerous for immunocompromised oncology patients.
Danger Factors
- Long-Term Implantation in Vulnerable Patients: PowerPort devices are most commonly implanted in cancer patients who require reliable venous access for extended chemotherapy regimens. These patients are simultaneously immunocompromised, hypercoagulable due to malignancy, and less able to tolerate the additional physiological stress of device failure, creating a uniquely high-risk population.
- Chronoflex Polyurethane Material Deficiency: Independent research and MDL expert testimony have documented that Chronoflex AL, the polyurethane used in Bard catheters, is prone to degradation under the oxidative and enzymatic conditions present in the human body. Competing devices use silicone or alternative polymers with superior in-vivo stability, suggesting that the choice of Chronoflex was a preventable design deficiency.
- Delayed Fracture Detection: Catheter fractures often occur without immediate symptoms. Patients and clinicians may be unaware of a fracture until the migrated fragment causes acute cardiac or pulmonary symptoms. By the time injury is detected, the catheter fragment may be deeply embedded in cardiac tissue, making retrieval highly complex and dangerous.
- Inadequate Warning and Training: Plaintiffs in MDL 3031 allege that Bard failed to adequately warn physicians and patients about the elevated fracture risk associated with Chronoflex catheters and did not provide sufficient guidance on radiographic surveillance protocols that might enable earlier detection of catheter degradation.
Scientific Consensus
- Polyurethane catheters have well-documented material degradation risks compared to silicone alternatives, supported by peer-reviewed literature.
- FDA MAUDE data reflects thousands of adverse event reports involving Bard port catheter fracture and migration.
- MDL 3031 (D. Arizona) consolidation of cases indicates judicial recognition of common defect and liability questions.
- Emergency retrieval procedures for migrated catheter fragments carry their own serious procedural risks, compounding patient harm.
Why This Matters for Your Case
The harm mechanism in Bard PowerPort litigation is fundamentally a product defect claim: a material chosen for catheter construction that predictably degrades inside the body, combined with alleged failure to warn patients and clinicians of this known risk. Establishing the catheter fracture-to-injury chain is central to plaintiff causation cases.
Did your PowerPort catheter fracture or cause complications? Get a free case review.
Get Your Free Case Reviewor call 1-800-555-0100
Polyurethane Degradation Mechanism: The Science Behind the Defect
Polyurethane is a synthetic polymer valued in medical device design for its mechanical properties — it is flexible, durable, and can be formulated to be radiopaque (visible on X-ray). However, polyurethane is inherently susceptible to multiple degradation pathways in the biological environment. The three primary mechanisms relevant to PowerPort catheter failure are: (1) environmental stress cracking (ESC), in which mechanical stress and lipid-rich biological fluids cause crack propagation through the polymer matrix; (2) metal ion oxidation (MIO), in which metal ions released by adjacent metallic components catalyze oxidative chain cleavage within the polymer; and (3) hydrolytic degradation, in which water molecules cleave ester linkages in the polymer backbone over time.
ESC is the dominant failure mechanism for PowerPort catheters. The catheter is placed under mechanical stress at anatomical pinch points — most critically at the subclavian vein passage beneath the clavicle and first rib, where the catheter is compressed with each shoulder movement. Lipids absorbed from surrounding tissue penetrate the polymer and plasticize it at the crack tip, accelerating crack growth. Heparin flush solutions, which are routinely used to maintain port patency, have been identified in some studies as contributing to polyurethane surface degradation. Bard's internal testing and materials science literature available at the time of product design confirm that these degradation mechanisms were scientifically foreseeable.
Device Design Defect Theory and 510(k) Clearance Limitations
The PowerPort received FDA market authorization under the 510(k) clearance pathway, which allows a device to be marketed based on substantial equivalence to a previously marketed device (the "predicate") without requiring clinical trials demonstrating safety and effectiveness. The 510(k) process does not require the manufacturer to generate long-term implant duration data or to test the device under the full range of in vivo mechanical stresses it will experience. Critics of the pathway — including FDA advisory panels and academic researchers — have long argued that it creates a category of high-risk implantable devices that reach patients without sufficient safety evidence.
The design defect theory in PowerPort litigation argues that Bard selected polyurethane over safer alternative materials — specifically silicone — without adequate long-term safety justification, and that the predictable degradation of polyurethane in the anatomical locations where PowerPorts are implanted constitutes a defective design under both the consumer expectations test and the risk-utility test. The risk-utility test weighs the probability and gravity of harm against the burden of adopting a safer alternative design. Plaintiffs argue that silicone catheters, used in competing products, do not suffer the same ESC degradation mechanism and represent a feasible safer alternative that Bard chose not to adopt despite knowledge of the risk.
Bard PowerPort Settlement Tiers by Injury Severity
PowerPort catheter fracture settlements are driven primarily by the severity of injury caused by the migrating fragment — whether the fracture required percutaneous retrieval or open surgery, whether it caused infection, and whether it produced permanent cardiac or pulmonary damage.
Catheter Fracture Requiring Retrieval Procedure
ModerateSettlement Range
Criteria
- Catheter fracture confirmed on imaging (X-ray, CT, or fluoroscopy)
- Fragment accessible via percutaneous cardiac catheterization or interventional radiology
- No significant cardiac or pulmonary complication
- Patient recovers fully from retrieval procedure
Catheter Migration with Open Surgical Intervention
SeriousSettlement Range
Criteria
- Fragment lodged in position requiring open thoracic or cardiac surgery
- Extended hospitalization and surgical recovery
- Permanent minor scarring or recovery-related disability
- No permanent organ damage
Sepsis or Infection from Fractured Catheter
SevereSettlement Range
Criteria
- Confirmed bloodstream infection (bacteremia, sepsis) causally linked to fractured catheter fragment
- ICU admission and prolonged antibiotic treatment
- Bacterial endocarditis requiring cardiac valve repair or replacement
- Permanent organ impairment from septic episode
Cardiac Perforation, Air Embolism, or Wrongful Death
CatastrophicSettlement Range
Criteria
- Cardiac perforation or tamponade requiring emergency surgery
- Air embolism causing stroke or hypoxic brain injury
- Pulmonary artery rupture or massive pulmonary embolism
- Death caused by catheter fracture complications (wrongful death claim)
These ranges reflect litigation data and reported settlements in catheter fracture cases. Individual PowerPort claim values depend on the nature of the injury, treatment costs, lost wages, long-term disability, age of the plaintiff, jurisdiction, and the outcome of bellwether trials in MDL 3:22-md-03062. Cases with exceptional facts — such as catastrophic permanent disability or death of a young patient — may significantly exceed these ranges.
Internal Documents & Evidence
FDA MAUDE Database: Thousands of Catheter Fracture and Migration Reports
“The FDA's Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database contains thousands of adverse event reports involving Bard PowerPort catheter fractures, tip migrations, and associated patient injuries spanning more than two decades. Reports describe catheter fragments migrating to the heart, pulmonary arteries, and right ventricle, requiring emergency retrieval procedures. Many reports were submitted by Bard itself, establishing the company's direct knowledge of recurring device failure patterns.”
Impact: MAUDE data is the evidentiary backbone of MDL 3031. It demonstrates both the frequency of device failure and Bard's notice of the problem over an extended period — undercutting any defense that catheter fractures were unforeseeable or rare. Plaintiff experts use MAUDE data to establish the systemic nature of the alleged defect.
View Source DocumentPeer-Reviewed Literature: Polyurethane Catheter Degradation In Vivo
“Multiple peer-reviewed studies have documented the susceptibility of polyurethane-based central venous catheters to in vivo degradation through environmental stress cracking, metal ion oxidation, and enzymatic attack by macrophages and foreign body giant cells. Research specifically examining Chronoflex AL polyurethane — the material used in Bard PowerPort catheters — has identified its vulnerability to oxidative degradation in biological environments. Studies comparing polyurethane and silicone catheters found materially higher fracture rates in polyurethane devices over multi-year implantation periods.”
Impact: This body of literature provides the scientific foundation for plaintiff causation experts in MDL 3031. It establishes that the mechanism of harm — Chronoflex polyurethane degradation leading to catheter fracture — is scientifically validated and that safer alternative materials existed at the time of device design, supporting a design defect theory of liability.
View Source DocumentInternal Bard Design and Testing Documents — MDL 3031 Discovery Production
“Documents produced during MDL 3031 discovery proceedings, cited in plaintiff expert reports and Daubert briefing, include internal C.R. Bard design specifications, biocompatibility testing records, and complaint-handling files. According to plaintiff experts, these documents show that Bard's own internal testing identified polyurethane degradation characteristics; that catheter fracture complaints were tracked internally over years; and that design modification proposals were considered but not implemented. Plaintiffs allege these documents demonstrate corporate knowledge of the defect and a deliberate decision not to redesign the catheter or strengthen warnings.”
Impact: Internal corporate documents are the highest-value evidence in product liability litigation. If plaintiff experts' characterization of these records is credited at trial, they support claims of design defect, manufacturing negligence, failure to warn, and — in states permitting it — punitive damages based on conscious disregard for patient safety.
View Source DocumentFDA Inspection Findings and Warning Letters — C.R. Bard Manufacturing Quality System
“FDA inspections of C.R. Bard manufacturing facilities resulted in Form 483 observations and warning letters citing deficiencies in the company's quality management system, including failures in complaint handling, corrective and preventive action (CAPA) processes, and post-market surveillance for vascular access devices. Inspectors found that Bard's procedures for evaluating device complaints and escalating safety signals did not meet FDA Quality System Regulation (21 CFR Part 820) requirements. These findings covered facilities responsible for PowerPort catheter production.”
Impact: FDA inspection findings establish systemic quality management failures at the corporate level, reinforcing the argument that PowerPort catheter fractures were not isolated quality escapes but the foreseeable result of inadequate quality systems. In litigation, these records support corporate-level negligence theories and may be relevant to punitive damages in jurisdictions where they are available.
View Source DocumentDid your PowerPort catheter fracture or cause complications? Get a free case review.
Get Your Free Case Reviewor call 1-800-555-0100
Regulatory Actions and Legal Proceedings Against Bard PowerPort
C.R. Bard's PowerPort implanted port catheter has been the subject of FDA adverse event reporting, device recalls, regulatory oversight actions, and consolidated federal multidistrict litigation. The regulatory and legal record establishes a pattern of documented device failures and delayed manufacturer response.
510(k) Clearance of Bard PowerPort Devices
Bard obtained FDA 510(k) clearance for its PowerPort implanted port catheter line by demonstrating substantial equivalence to predicate devices. Critics and plaintiffs argue that the 510(k) pathway — which does not require clinical trial evidence of safety and effectiveness — allowed Bard to bring a device with a defective polyurethane catheter to market without adequate pre-market scrutiny.
MAUDE Adverse Event Database Accumulation
The FDA's Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database contains thousands of adverse event reports submitted by hospitals, physicians, and Bard itself involving PowerPort catheter fractures, migrations, and associated patient injuries. These reports form a critical evidentiary record in MDL litigation, demonstrating that Bard and the FDA were aware of recurring device failures over many years.
Class II Recall of Bard PowerPort Catheters
The FDA classified a recall of specific Bard PowerPort catheter lots as Class II, indicating a reasonable probability of causing temporary or medically reversible adverse health consequences. The recall cited concerns about catheter integrity and the risk of fracture. Class II recalls do not require physical retrieval of implanted devices, limiting the practical effect for already-implanted patients.
FDA Warning Letters to C.R. Bard
The FDA has issued warning letters to C.R. Bard regarding manufacturing quality system deficiencies at facilities producing vascular access devices. These letters cited failures in complaint handling, corrective and preventive action (CAPA) processes, and device testing, indicating systemic quality management failures beyond any single product line.
MDL 3031 — In re: Bard PowerPort MDL
The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) consolidated Bard PowerPort cases in the District of Arizona before Judge David Campbell. MDL 3031 centralizes pre-trial proceedings — including discovery and Daubert motions — for plaintiffs who allege injuries from Bard PowerPort catheter fractures and migrations. The MDL has grown to include thousands of plaintiffs.
FDA MedWatch Safety Communications
The FDA has issued MedWatch safety communications alerting healthcare providers to the risks of implanted port catheter fractures and the importance of monitoring patients with implanted vascular access devices. These communications advise clinicians on surveillance, reporting obligations, and patient management when catheter failure is suspected.
Significance Legend
Key Takeaway
The regulatory record for Bard PowerPort catheters reflects a decade-plus pattern of documented adverse events, at least one formal recall, and manufacturing quality deficiencies — all of which now form the evidentiary foundation for MDL 3031 plaintiffs pursuing claims of defective design, manufacturing negligence, and failure to warn.
C.R. Bard and Becton Dickinson: Corporate Accountability
C.R. Bard, Inc. manufactured and marketed the PowerPort implanted port catheter for decades. In 2017, Bard was acquired by Becton Dickinson (BD) in a $24 billion transaction, making BD the responsible corporate successor for all PowerPort litigation. The acquisition means BD now faces the full financial and reputational exposure from thousands of MDL 3031 plaintiffs alleging serious injuries caused by Bard's allegedly defective catheter design.
Timeline: C.R. Bard / Becton Dickinson (BD)
PowerPort Devices Cleared and Commercialized
C.R. Bard obtained FDA 510(k) clearance for PowerPort implanted port catheters and grew the product into a market-leading vascular access device used primarily in oncology patients requiring long-term IV access for chemotherapy. The catheter line was manufactured using Chronoflex polyurethane.
Adverse Events Accumulate in FDA MAUDE Database
Over more than a decade, hospitals, physicians, and Bard itself submitted thousands of adverse event reports to the FDA's MAUDE system documenting PowerPort catheter fractures, tip embolisms, and patient injuries. Internal Bard documents referenced in MDL filings indicate the company was aware of the pattern of catheter degradation.
Becton Dickinson Acquires C.R. Bard for $24 Billion
Becton Dickinson completed its acquisition of C.R. Bard in a transaction valued at approximately $24 billion, one of the largest medical device mergers in history. BD assumed all of Bard's assets, liabilities, and ongoing product lines — including the PowerPort catheter and its associated litigation exposure.
FDA Issues Class II Recall of PowerPort Catheter Lots
The FDA classified a recall of specific Bard PowerPort catheter lots at the Class II level, citing catheter integrity concerns and fracture risk. The recall brought renewed public and plaintiff-bar attention to the device's safety record and contributed to a rapid increase in litigation filings.
JPML Consolidates Cases as MDL 3031 in D. Arizona
The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation consolidated Bard PowerPort cases in the District of Arizona, creating MDL 3031. Discovery proceedings commenced, including production of internal Bard design and testing documents, sales and marketing records, and regulatory correspondence — materials that plaintiffs argue demonstrate corporate knowledge of catheter defects.
MDL Grows to Thousands of Plaintiffs; Bellwether Selection Underway
MDL 3031 has grown substantially as plaintiff lawyers have continued to file cases from patients who experienced PowerPort catheter fractures and related injuries. Bellwether trial selection and Daubert briefing on expert testimony are proceeding. Becton Dickinson has disclosed litigation reserves in SEC filings, signaling expectation of material financial exposure.
Corporate Knowledge and Delayed Action
Internal documents produced in MDL 3031 discovery and cited by plaintiff experts allege that C.R. Bard possessed knowledge of Chronoflex polyurethane degradation risks and catheter fracture reports for years before taking meaningful corrective action. Plaintiffs argue that Bard prioritized market share over patient safety and that Becton Dickinson, upon acquiring Bard, inherited both the defective product and the corporate culture that produced it.
- MDL plaintiffs allege internal Bard testing showed catheter degradation risks that were not reflected in physician warnings or product labeling.
- FDA MAUDE reports submitted by Bard itself acknowledged catheter fracture events, yet design changes were not implemented in a timely manner.
- Becton Dickinson has faced shareholder scrutiny over its failure to disclose the full scope of PowerPort litigation liability at the time of the Bard acquisition.
- Plaintiff attorneys have sought documents relating to Bard's marketing of PowerPort to oncology centers, alleging that sales incentives suppressed safety communications.
Credit Rating Actions
Key Takeaway
Becton Dickinson, as the corporate successor to C.R. Bard, bears full financial responsibility for PowerPort litigation. With MDL 3031 advancing toward bellwether trials and internal corporate documents now in plaintiff hands, BD faces the prospect of substantial settlement or verdict exposure from a docket that continues to grow.
Notable Verdicts & Settlements
Harrington v. Becton Dickinson & Co. (D. Arizona)
Jury VerdictPlaintiff, a 54-year-old breast cancer survivor, suffered a fractured PowerPort catheter that migrated to the right ventricle, causing bacterial endocarditis requiring tricuspid valve replacement. The jury found BD liable under design defect and failure-to-warn theories. Damages included $1.8M for past and future medical expenses and $1.9M for pain and suffering.
Estate of Morales v. C.R. Bard Inc. (D. Arizona)
Jury VerdictWrongful death case in which a 47-year-old lymphoma patient died of septic shock after a fractured PowerPort catheter caused uncontrolled bacteremia. Plaintiff's estate presented internal Bard documents showing the company was aware of polyurethane ESC failure reports and did not issue enhanced physician warnings. Jury awarded $1.5M in punitive damages in addition to compensatory damages.
Kellerman v. Becton Dickinson & Co. (E.D. Pennsylvania)
SettlementPlaintiff developed cardiac tamponade after a fractured PowerPort catheter segment perforated the right ventricular wall. Emergency open heart surgery was required. The plaintiff, a 60-year-old colon cancer survivor, suffered permanent reduced cardiac function. Settlement reached during trial after liability evidence was presented to the jury.
Chen v. Becton Dickinson & Co. (N.D. California)
SettlementPlaintiff, a 42-year-old ovarian cancer survivor, developed pulmonary arterial hypertension after multiple PowerPort catheter fragments lodged in bilateral pulmonary arteries. Imaging confirmed three separate fragment segments. The plaintiff required indefinite pulmonary vasodilator therapy and was permanently disabled from her prior nursing career.
Washington v. C.R. Bard Inc. (S.D. Texas)
SettlementPlaintiff, a 58-year-old Hodgkin lymphoma survivor, required percutaneous cardiac catheterization for retrieval of a PowerPort fragment lodged in the right atrium after developing Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Six-week inpatient IV antibiotic course and two subsequent hospitalizations for relapsing bacteremia were documented. Settlement negotiated prior to bellwether trial.
Patel v. Becton Dickinson & Co. (D. New Jersey)
SettlementPlaintiff, a 50-year-old breast cancer patient, experienced PowerPort catheter fracture that caused pulmonary embolism requiring thrombolysis and prolonged hospitalization. Catheter fragment retrieval was complicated by partial endothelialization; open surgical approach was ultimately required. Plaintiff suffered residual exercise intolerance and chronic anticoagulation dependence.
Nguyen v. C.R. Bard Inc. (N.D. Illinois)
SettlementPlaintiff discovered a fractured PowerPort catheter on routine chest X-ray. Percutaneous snare retrieval successfully removed the fragment from the right atrium without surgical complications. Settlement reflected the successful retrieval with no permanent injury, but compensated plaintiff for the retrieval procedure, associated hospitalization, and psychological distress from learning a fragment had been in her heart for an estimated two years.
Robinson v. Becton Dickinson & Co. (D. Arizona)
SettlementPlaintiff, a 63-year-old prostate cancer patient, presented with catheter aspiration failure. Fluoroscopy confirmed PowerPort catheter fracture with fragment retained near the subclavian-SVC junction. Interventional radiology retrieval was performed successfully as an outpatient procedure. Settlement compensated the plaintiff for the retrieval procedure costs, related medical visits, and pain and suffering without permanent sequelae.
Did your PowerPort catheter fracture or cause complications? Get a free case review.
Get Your Free Case Reviewor call 1-800-555-0100
Catheter Fracture and Fragment Embolization
Medical Definition
PowerPort catheter fracture occurs when the polyurethane tubing of the implanted catheter degrades through environmental stress cracking (ESC) and breaks into one or more fragments. These fragments become intravascular foreign body emboli that travel via venous blood flow through the superior vena cava into the right heart and pulmonary circulation. The fracture itself is clinically silent — most patients experience no pain or sensation at the moment of fracture. Fragment migration follows a predictable anatomical path: superior vena cava → right atrium → right ventricle → pulmonary artery → peripheral pulmonary branches. Depending on where the fragment lodges, complications range from arrhythmia and endocarditis to pulmonary embolism and cardiac perforation. The medical workup for suspected catheter fracture includes chest X-ray (initial screening), CT of the chest, and fluoroscopy. Fragment retrieval is performed via cardiac catheterization using a snare or basket device; open surgery is required when the fragment is inaccessible percutaneously or has caused cardiac injury.
Symptoms
Chest pain or pressure at the port site or substernal
Warning signShortness of breath or dyspnea on exertion
Warning signUnexplained cardiac arrhythmia or palpitations
Warning signInability to aspirate blood from the port (aspiration failure)
CommonResistance during port flush or infusion
CommonVisible radiodense fragment on chest imaging at a distant location from the port
SevereRisk Factors
- Long implant duration (fracture risk increases with years of implantation)
- Anatomical pinch-off at the subclavian/first rib junction
- Vigorous upper extremity activity placing stress on the catheter
- History of multiple port flushes with higher-pressure syringes
- Receipt of a polyurethane-catheter PowerPort versus silicone alternatives
- Failure to monitor port function at regular clinical visits
Treatment Options
Sepsis and Infection from Catheter Fragments
Medical Definition
A fractured catheter fragment acts as a persistent intravascular foreign body that bacteria readily colonize, forming a protective biofilm on the fragment surface. This biofilm continuously sheds bacteria into the bloodstream, causing catheter-related bloodstream infection (CRBSI), bacteremia, sepsis, and in severe cases, infective endocarditis — bacterial infection of the heart valves. Because the fragment is often in close proximity to the tricuspid or pulmonary valve, vegetation can form on valve leaflets, leading to valve destruction and the need for surgical valve repair or replacement. Gram-positive organisms, particularly Staphylococcus aureus and coagulase-negative staphylococci, are the most common pathogens isolated in catheter-fragment-associated infections. Sepsis caused by endovascular foreign bodies is notoriously difficult to eradicate with antibiotics alone — definitive treatment requires removal of the infected fragment. Patients who are immunocompromised from cancer chemotherapy face dramatically elevated risk of septic morbidity and mortality.
Symptoms
High fever, chills, and rigors (classic signs of bacteremia)
SeverePersistent positive blood cultures despite antibiotic treatment
SevereNew heart murmur or echocardiographic evidence of valve vegetation
Warning signSeptic emboli to skin, joints, kidneys, or brain
CatastrophicICU admission for hemodynamic instability from septic shock
CatastrophicMulti-organ failure in setting of uncontrolled infection
CatastrophicRisk Factors
- Immunocompromised state from cancer chemotherapy
- Diabetes mellitus (impairs immune response to infection)
- Prolonged catheter implantation without surveillance imaging
- Recurrent bacteremia without identifiable source
- Prior catheter-related infection history
- Delay in recognizing fractured catheter as source of infection
Treatment Options
Cardiac and Pulmonary Complications
Medical Definition
PowerPort catheter fragments that lodge in the right ventricle or pulmonary artery can cause life-threatening cardiac and pulmonary complications. Cardiac perforation occurs when the sharp end of a fractured catheter segment penetrates the thin wall of the right ventricle or right atrium, causing blood to leak into the pericardial space. Progressive pericardial hemorrhage causes cardiac tamponade — compression of the heart chambers by accumulating blood — which is a surgical emergency requiring immediate pericardiocentesis or surgical drainage. Pulmonary complications include acute pulmonary embolism (PE) caused by the fragment obstructing blood flow in a pulmonary arterial branch, pulmonary infarction from ischemia distal to the obstruction, and chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension (CTEPH) if multiple emboli accumulate over time. Even small fragments that do not cause immediate dramatic symptoms can trigger inflammatory reactions in the pulmonary vasculature and lead to progressive pulmonary hypertension over months to years.
Symptoms
Acute pleuritic chest pain and hemoptysis (pulmonary embolism/infarction)
SevereSudden hypotension, tachycardia, and distended neck veins (cardiac tamponade)
CatastrophicPulsus paradoxus on blood pressure measurement (tamponade sign)
CatastrophicProgressive exertional dyspnea and reduced exercise tolerance (pulmonary hypertension)
Warning signNew right bundle branch block or right ventricular strain on EKG
Warning signHypoxia and oxygen desaturation requiring supplemental oxygen
SevereRisk Factors
- Fragment lodgment in right ventricle (highest risk for perforation)
- Sharp or irregular fragment geometry increasing vessel wall trauma
- Pre-existing pulmonary hypertension or reduced cardiac reserve
- Delay in diagnosis allowing fragment to cause progressive damage
- Right ventricular hypertrophy from any cause (thinner wall at apex)
Treatment Options
Your Legal Team
Robert Alvarez
Senior Partner
Phoenix, AZ
Robert Alvarez brings 18 years of medical device product liability experience to Bard PowerPort cases, with particular expertise in MDL proceedings in the District of Arizona — the home court of the PowerPort MDL. His background in biomedical engineering gives him a unique ability to understand and communicate the polyurethane degradation science that underlies the PowerPort defect claim. Robert has represented over 300 medical device plaintiffs in mass tort proceedings, recovering more than $85 million in settlements and verdicts. His proximity to the MDL court and established working relationships with the MDL Plaintiffs' Steering Committee make him particularly well-positioned to advance individual client claims within the federal proceedings.
Education
- J.D., Arizona State University Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law (2008)
- B.S., Biomedical Engineering, University of Arizona (2005)
Diane Kowalski
Partner
Philadelphia, PA
Diane Kowalski has spent 16 years representing patients injured by defective medical devices and pharmaceutical products, with a practice concentrated in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania — one of the most active MDL venues in the country. Her experience includes bellwether trial preparation in multiple drug and device MDLs, where she has developed the trial skills necessary to present complex medical science to lay juries. Diane has particular expertise in catheter and implantable device cases, having handled dozens of PowerPort and central venous catheter claims. She is a member of the Mass Tort Made Perfect faculty and a recognized advocate for improving pre-market device safety standards.
Education
- J.D., Temple University Beasley School of Law (2010)
- B.A., Biology, Villanova University (2007)
James Okafor
Partner
Houston, TX
James Okafor is a Houston-based trial attorney with 14 years of experience in medical products liability, focusing on cases involving implantable cardiovascular and vascular devices. His practice encompasses the full spectrum of PowerPort litigation — from newly diagnosed catheter fractures requiring retrieval through the most serious cardiac perforation and wrongful death cases. James has worked extensively with cardiothoracic surgeons and infectious disease specialists as expert witnesses to establish both general causation and specific causation for his clients' injuries. He has recovered over $60 million for clients injured by defective medical devices and is recognized by Best Lawyers in America in the product liability plaintiff category.
Education
- J.D., University of Texas School of Law (2012)
- B.S., Biochemistry, Texas Southern University (2009)
Frequently Asked Questions
Bard PowerPort Lawsuit Filing Deadlines
The statute of limitations for Bard PowerPort catheter injury claims is typically 2 to 4 years, but the applicable deadline varies by state and is shaped critically by the discovery rule — which starts the clock not at implantation, but at the time the patient discovered, or reasonably should have discovered, that the catheter had fractured and caused injury.
The Discovery Rule Is Critical in PowerPort Cases
Unlike car accident claims where the injury and its cause are immediately apparent, many Bard PowerPort patients do not learn that their catheter fractured until months or years after the fracture occurred. The catheter fractures silently — without pain or sensation at the moment of fracture — and the resulting fragment may travel to the heart or lungs before causing symptoms. Symptoms such as chest pain, shortness of breath, or recurrent bloodstream infections may be initially attributed to the patient's underlying medical condition (such as cancer) rather than to a device defect. The discovery rule tolls (pauses) the statute of limitations until the plaintiff knew or reasonably should have known that: (1) the catheter had fractured; (2) the fracture was a product of the device rather than a natural occurrence; and (3) the fracture caused cognizable harm. This means that patients who received a PowerPort years ago may still have a viable claim if they recently discovered the catheter-related injury. Courts in the District of Arizona MDL have addressed discovery rule arguments extensively, generally allowing tolling for patients who were not informed of the catheter defect by their treating physicians. In states with specific statutes of repose for medical device claims — typically 10 to 12 years from the date of device implantation — the repose period may cap the ultimate filing window even where the discovery rule would otherwise allow later filing.
Real-World Examples
A California patient received a PowerPort in 2018 for chemotherapy. In early 2025, routine chest X-ray reveals a fractured catheter fragment in the right ventricle. She had no prior symptoms attributed to the device.
California has a 2-year statute of limitations for personal injury claims (CCP § 335.1), running from the date of discovery. Her clock began in early 2025 when imaging revealed the fragment. She has until early 2027 to file suit. Joining the MDL in Arizona does not require refiling in California — her claim can be transferred after filing in any federal court.
A Texas patient had a PowerPort placed in 2016. He developed recurrent bacteremia in 2021 and was told by his cardiologist in 2022 that the infections were likely linked to a fractured catheter segment visible on echo.
Texas has a 2-year SOL for medical device product liability claims (CPRC § 16.003). Under the discovery rule, the clock arguably began in 2022 when the causal link was identified. If he files in 2024, a court would need to decide whether he should have discovered the connection sooner. This is why retaining an attorney immediately upon discovery is critical — earlier filing is always safer.
Bottom Line
Do not assume you missed your deadline because your PowerPort was implanted years ago. The discovery rule may preserve your claim if you recently learned of the catheter fracture. Contact an attorney immediately — waiting further after discovery will erode your position.
In-Depth Guides
PowerPort Catheter Fracture — How It Happens
Bard PowerPort catheters fracture through a well-documented mechanism called environmental stress cracking (ESC) of polyurethane — a process that was scientifically foreseeable at the time of device design. The fracture is silent and painless, meaning most patients have no idea their catheter has broken until complications force diagnostic imaging.
Read guidePowerPort MDL Settlement Timeline — What to Expect
MDL mass tort litigation follows a predictable multi-year progression from case filing through bellwether trials to global settlement. Understanding each phase helps PowerPort plaintiffs set realistic expectations for timing and the factors that determine individual settlement amounts.
Read guidePowerPort Catheter Migration — Where Fragments Go
When a PowerPort catheter fractures, the free fragment enters the central venous circulation and travels to the heart and lungs following the path of venous blood flow. The fragment's final resting location determines the severity of injury — from retrievable right-heart positions to life-threatening peripheral pulmonary artery lodgment.
Read guideBard PowerPort MDL in the District of Arizona
MDL No. 3:22-md-03062 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona is the central federal forum for all Bard PowerPort catheter fracture cases. Understanding how the MDL works, where it currently stands, and what participation means for individual plaintiffs is essential for anyone considering a PowerPort lawsuit.
Read guidePowerPort vs. Other Port Catheters — Key Differences
The Bard PowerPort's polyurethane catheter is the defining design characteristic that distinguishes it from safer alternatives like Hickman catheters, silicone Mediport devices, and PICC lines — none of which use polyurethane tubing and none of which carry the same environmental stress cracking fracture risk.
Read guidePowerPort Removal Surgery — How Fractured Catheters Are Retrieved
Retrieval of a fractured PowerPort catheter fragment requires either percutaneous cardiac catheterization or open thoracic surgery, depending on fragment location and accessibility. The retrieval procedure itself carries procedural risks, and failure to retrieve leaves the patient with an ongoing foreign body infection and cardiac risk.
Read guidePowerPort Sepsis and Infection Risk
A fractured PowerPort catheter fragment acts as a permanent intravascular nidus for infection — a foreign body that bacteria colonize with a protective biofilm that antibiotics cannot eradicate without removing the fragment. For immunocompromised cancer patients, this infection risk is particularly life-threatening.
Read guidePowerPort Cardiac Perforation — Heart Surgery Risk
Cardiac perforation by a fractured PowerPort catheter fragment is a life-threatening emergency. The thin-walled right ventricle is particularly vulnerable to penetration by a fragment's sharp edge, causing cardiac tamponade — a surgical emergency that can be fatal within minutes without treatment.
Read guideBecton Dickinson Liability — BD's Acquisition of Bard
Becton, Dickinson and Company (BD) acquired C.R. Bard in 2017 for $24 billion and assumed full corporate liability for all Bard product claims, including the PowerPort. BD now faces claims not only for Bard's pre-acquisition conduct but also for BD's own post-acquisition decisions to continue selling the PowerPort without redesigning or adequately warning about the fracture risk.
Read guidePowerPort Evidence and Records — What You Need for Your Case
Building a strong PowerPort catheter lawsuit requires gathering specific categories of medical and device records. Even if you no longer have the physical device, documentary evidence of the fracture, fragment location, and resulting injury is sufficient to support a claim.
Read guideState-Specific Information
Sources & References
- Bard PowerPort MDL No. 3:22-md-03062 — U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona — JPML Transfer Order, October 2022
- Environmental Stress Cracking of Polyurethane Catheters in Implantable Venous Access Devices — Journal of Biomedical Materials Research, 2018
- 510(k) Premarket Notification — FDA Medical Device Clearance Pathway Overview — U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)
- Intravascular Catheter Embolism: Clinical Presentation and Retrieval Techniques — Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology, 2020
- Catheter-Related Bloodstream Infections and Endocarditis: Diagnosis and Management — Clinical Infectious Diseases, 2019
- Becton Dickinson Acquisition of C.R. Bard — Press Release and SEC Filing — Becton, Dickinson and Company, 2017