Port Catheter Lawsuit Information
Explore current information about port catheter lawsuits, reported device issues and case developments.
Compensation Evaluation
When a Port Breaks, the Danger Can Travel.
Your treatment follows this path.
The port sends medication through a thin catheter into a large vein.
The material is under scrutiny.
Barium sulfate helps the tube appear on imaging. Attorneys allege it weakened some catheters. Bard disputes that claim.
A tiny crack. A complete break.
A fracture can leave a loose catheter piece inside the body.
The broken piece can move.
Fragments may travel through a vein toward the heart or lungs. Removal may require another procedure.
Treatment can escape its path.
Another possible complication is leakage. Medication outside the vein can injure nearby tissue.
What happened to your port?
Fracture. Leakage. Infection. Another surgery. Tell us what happened and start your free review.
Free Case Review$40 millionPowerPort verdict
One patient took on Bard. A Jury made them Pay!
Symptoms patients have reported.
Patients have reported pain near the collarbone, pins and needles in an arm, an irregular heartbeat and palpitations after a port moved or fractured. A fragment lodged in the heart may require open heart surgery. If you notice symptoms, speak with your doctor.
In a study of more than 90,000 Medicare patients, 59% had at least one recorded complication within five years. That figure does not mean a device defect caused every event. Read the study.
Problems reported after a port implant.
Ports can remain implanted for years. Reports describe catheters breaking apart, becoming dislodged, moving away from the port or leaking. Leakage and device problems may raise the risk of infection.
- Catheter breakage inside the body
- Dislodgement or migration
- Leakage and infection
- Fragments lodged in the heart or lungs
Some patients need another procedure or emergency surgery after a serious complication.
Research and court history
From early research to a $40 million verdict
The early studies examined different catheters. The Bard and AngioDynamics cases follow separate court tracks.
Conceptual illustrations. The studies did not all examine Bard PowerPorts.
-
1985
Early catheter research
Researchers examined the surfaces of several catheter types. This was not a Bard PowerPort study.
-
2001
A fracture under the microscope
A case report on a different dialysis catheter found weak spots involving barium sulfate clusters and trapped air.
-
2010
Material loss and infection questions
A study of temporary dialysis catheters examined barium sulfate release, surface damage and bacterial growth. It did not test Bard PowerPorts.
-
2016
Port materials tested
Researchers compared materials from two other port catheter makers and found differences in surface and mechanical properties.
-
2020
A PowerPort complaint
A Kentucky PowerPort complaint alleged catheter fracture and failures to warn. Allegations are not findings of fact.
-
2023
Bard cases grouped
Federal Bard implanted port cases were centralized in Arizona for coordinated pretrial proceedings.
-
2024
A separate port case track
Federal AngioDynamics and Navilyst port cases were centralized in California, separately from Bard.
-
2026
$40 million Bard verdict
On September 4, a jury awarded one patient $40 million after a Bard PowerPort catheter fractured. It was an individual result.
Explore port catheter lawsuit information and attorney review options.
Call us toll free · Nationwide legal help
NEED HELP NOW?
+1 (800) 370-2322