Medical device manufacturer Bard faces mounting litigation over serious complications associated with its PowerPort implantable catheter devices. As of May 2025, approximately 1,410 cases are pending in Arizona federal court, with initial bellwether trials expected to begin later this year.
Our attorneys are actively reviewing claims involving:
- Catheter fractures and migrations through blood vessels
- Life-threatening infections and blood clots
- Cardiac complications requiring intervention
- Device failures requiring surgical removal
How to Identify if You Have a Bard PowerPort
Patients who receive Bard PowerPort devices are typically given a PowerPort ID Card by their implanting physician. This distinctive pink card contains critical information about the specific device including the manufacturer’s name, device name, model number, serial number, lot number, and implantation date.
Some recipients may also receive a rubber PowerPort bracelet with different colors identifying the specific port device implanted. These identification items are essential because medical providers must know exactly which port device was implanted, as different ports have different pressure ratings for fluid intake.
If you’re unsure whether you have a Bard PowerPort device, check your medical records or contact your healthcare provider who performed the implantation procedure.
PowerPort Device Complications
The Bard PowerPort litigation involves several documented device complications that have led to serious patient harm. Court records show that PowerPort failures often manifest as catheter fractures, where pieces of the device break off and migrate through blood vessels. These fragments can cause severe damage, requiring emergency medical intervention and device removal.
Other significant complications documented in the litigation include deep vein thrombosis, where dangerous blood clots form around the catheter, and tissue erosion, where the device damages surrounding blood vessels and tissue. Many patients have experienced chronic infections requiring removal of the device, while others report complete port failure that prevents proper medication delivery.
A particularly concerning issue is Pinch-Off Syndrome, where the catheter becomes compressed between the collarbone and first rib. This compression can lead to device malfunction and potential fracture of the catheter.
Device failures may require additional surgeries, extended hospitalization, and ongoing medical treatment. These complications often result in significant medical expenses, lost wages, and other damages that may be compensable through legal action.
If you experienced complications after receiving a PowerPort implant, maintain thorough documentation of your medical treatment and contact our legal team to discuss your options for pursuing compensation through the current litigation.
MDL Litigation Status May 2025
Arizona MDL 3081 Overview
The Bard PowerPort™ lawsuits are consolidated in Arizona federal court (IN RE: Bard Implanted Port Catheter Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 3081), where Judge David G. Campbell is overseeing the proceedings.
As of May 2025, the litigation includes over 1,410 active cases and continues to grow rapidly, with approximately 100 new cases being filed monthly. Recent court developments have strengthened plaintiffs’ positions, with Becton Dickinson accepting shared financial responsibility for settlements.
Key Litigation Developments
- Both plaintiffs and defendants have submitted their proposed bellwether cases, though they currently only agree on one of the selected cases
- A status conference was held on May 1, 2025, to discuss finalizing bellwether trial selection
- The court has denied plaintiffs’ request to extend fact discovery, requiring all depositions to be completed by January 2026
- Judge Campbell has expressed intent to resolve the litigation by 2026
Important Upcoming Deadlines
- May 23, 2025: Deadline for expert witness reports
- June 20, 2025: Deadline for plaintiffs’ rebuttal expert reports
- August 22, 2025: Deadline for expert witness depositions
- Late 2025 or early 2026: Expected start of first bellwether trials
PowerPort Device Background
Bard’s PowerPort is an injection port, port-a-catheter or “port-a-cath” which are implantable vascular access devices designed to provide repeated access to the vascular system for the delivery of medication, intravenous fluids, parenteral nutrition solutions, and blood products.
Also, some implantable ports, like Bard’s PowerPort, are “power-injectable” which lets medical providers inject contrast dyes into the port to perform contrast CT scans and MRIs.
The PowerPort is about the size of a quarter and surgically placed under the skin and has a catheter that is inserted into one of the body’s large central veins in the upper chest or neck area (usually the upper vena cava, jugular vein, or subclavian vein).
Surgically implantable ports are typically preferred over Peripherally Inserted Central Catheter (PICC) lines when the patient needs delivery of medications, fluids, or blood products over longer periods (many months or years). PICC lines, which are typically placed into one of the large veins in the arm using local anesthetic, are preferable for shorter term use and can be left in place for weeks or a few months.
Because Bard’s PowerPort devices allow high injection rates of contrast agents used in CT and MRI scans, these devices are often implanted in cancer patients to receive chemotherapy.
Bard’s first PowerPort device was cleared by the FDA in 2000 via the controversial 510(k) process. Unlike the more rigorous Pre-Market Approval (PMA) process, which requires the manufacturer to provide significant data showing the medical device is safe and efficacious before approval by the FDA, the 510(k) process does not require the medical device manufacturer to show safety or efficacy.
For a medical device to be “cleared” by the FDA for marketing under 510(k), the manufacturer need only show the device is substantially similar to a device already on the market. Additional PowerPort devices were cleared for marketing under the 510(k) process in 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2012, 2014 and 2019.
Bard PowerPort Products
There are several implantable ports and catheters sold under Bard’s PowerPort brand including:
- Bard Groshong MRI implantable injection PowerPort
- Groshong Central Venous Catheter
- Bard PowerPort MRI Implantable Port
These devices vary in design but share similar materials and manufacturing processes that are at issue in the current litigation. Regardless of which specific PowerPort model you received, you may be eligible to join the litigation if you’ve experienced complications.
Technical Defects Leading to Device Failure
The PowerPort devices were designed to use catheters made of a polymeric mixture of polyurethane and barium sulfate called “Chronoflex AL.” Barium sulfate is known to adversely affect the mechanical integrity of polyurethane in vivo by dissociating from the catheter’s surface, leaving microfractures and other changes which degrade the polyurethane catheter’s integrity.
The lawsuits allege Bard’s manufacturing process involves using too high a concentration of barium sulfate leading to structural changes and degradation of the catheter’s surface. Over time, these areas of degradation and structural weakness can cause the catheter to fracture or allow for the accumulation of bacteria causing infection.
FDA Adverse Event Reporting History
A key issue in this litigation involves Bard’s reporting of adverse events. For years, Bard utilized an FDA exemption program that allowed them to submit adverse event reports to a non-public database rather than the publicly accessible MAUDE database. This “Alternative Summary Reporting Program” permitted manufacturers to file quarterly or annual summary reports instead of individual reports for each adverse event.
An investigative report by Kaiser Health in 2019 exposed this practice, revealing that millions of adverse events for various medical devices, including Bard PowerPorts, had been hidden from public view. Bard categorized PowerPort complications as “compression or pinch-off events” that were “known risks” resulting from physician error rather than device defects, allowing them to use the summary reporting exemption.
Following public pressure, the FDA terminated this reporting program and released over 5.7 million previously undisclosed adverse event reports. The subsequent disclosure of numerous PowerPort complications contributed significantly to the current litigation.
Manufacturer Liability Issues
Lawsuits allege that Bard knew the PowerPort was defectively designed, with an excessive concentration of barium sulfate that could compromise the structural integrity of the catheter. When these catheters fracture or migrate, they can cause severe injuries including vascular damage, blood clots, and even cardiac complications.
Plaintiffs claim that rather than addressing these design issues, Bard attempted to shift blame onto implanting physicians by attributing complications to improper insertion technique.
Current Legal Claims
The primary claims in the PowerPort lawsuits are those often seen in other medical device-based product liability lawsuits such as strict liability failure to warn and design defect, negligent failure to warn, negligent design, breach of express and implied warranties, misrepresentations, concealment of material facts and violation of various state consumer protection laws.
Generally, the theme underlying all these claims is the defendants knew of the injuries caused by the PowerPort device but did not warn patients and doctors of these risks.
The defendants in the PowerPort lawsuits are Bard Access Systems, Inc., C.R. Bard, Inc., and Becton Dickinson and Company. Bard Access Systems, a Utah corporation, is the entity responsible for developing, designing manufacturing and distribution the PowerPort. Bard Access Systems is a subsidiary of C.R. Bard, Inc. which is incorporated and has its principal place of business in New Jersey. In 2017, Becton Dickinson acquired C.R. Bard and Bard Access Systems. These are the primary defendants, but other defendants may be proper depending on the specific facts of the case and which state law applies.
Legal Consultation and Case Evaluation
If you experienced device migration, fracture, infection, blood clots, or other serious complications requiring medical intervention, we can evaluate your potential claim.
Time limits apply to these cases, so prompt action is important. Our experienced attorneys will review your medical records to determine your eligibility and explain your options clearly. We handle PowerPort cases on a contingent fee basis, which means we advance all litigation costs and only collect legal fees when we secure compensation for you.
Please complete our secure case evaluation form below to discuss your potential PowerPort case with us.