TIVAD Lawsuit | Latest Updates

TIVAD ports, also known as Port-a-Cath, have been the subject of hundreds of lawsuits filed across the U.S. Our legal team brings hands-on expertise having directly managed thousands of TIVAD-related claims and guided clients through every stage of the litigation process. The primary allegations against manufacturers claim these medical devices caused serious injuries including infections, sepsis, internal bleeding, heart damage, and even death.

The lawsuits allege that TIVAD ports made of silicone mixed with barium sulfate can weaken over time, causing the implanted ports to break or leak.

Latest TIVAD Lawsuit Updates

• October 2021 – A lawsuit was filed on behalf of a cancer patient who was injured after his TIVAD port broke and leaked chemotherapy medications into his body from the port implantation site. The complaint was filed by the family of Jesus L. III, who was implanted with an AngioDynamics Vortex Port in June 2019 at Texas Children’s Hospital in Houston for chemotherapy [1].
• June 2019 – Less than two weeks after receiving the totally implanted port, the patient had to undergo another surgery to remove the vortex port after the device failed. It was determined that the port was leaking chemotherapy medication under his skin around the port. In May 2021, Jesus L. III sadly died following complications with the device [2].

FDA Reports and Statistics

According to reports, the FDA approved the Vortex Port in December 2006 [3]. Shortly after approval, the manufacturers allegedly began receiving reports of the Vortex Port breaking after being implanted, with fractured pieces of the device migrating to other areas of the body, including the heart and lungs.

The FDA has received numerous reports of catheter fractures, dislodgement, and other complications associated with TIVAD devices. These reports highlight the potential risks of device failure and subsequent patient harm.

TIVAD Injuries & Side Effects

TIVAD ports have been linked to numerous life-threatening injuries and complications, including:

• Hemorrhage: Internal bleeding that can be life-threatening
• Cardiac complications: Including cardiac/pericardial tamponade (pressure around the heart) and cardiac arrhythmia
• Device failure: Breakage, leakage of medications and fluids into the body, septum dislodgements
• Infections: Including sepsis which can be fatal
• Tissue damage: Perforations of tissue, vessels, and organs, erosion through the skin, necrosis
• Cancer advancement: When the TIVAD breaks or leaks medication, which reduces the effectiveness of chemotherapy
• Severe complications: Requiring removal surgery or resulting in death

Do You Qualify for a TIVAD Lawsuit?

You may qualify for a TIVAD lawsuit if:

• You received a TIVAD port implantation.
• You experienced serious side effects including infections, sepsis, internal bleeding, heart damage, device breakage or leakage.
• The injuries required medical treatment or hospitalization.
• You can provide medical documentation linking your injuries to the TIVAD device.

Evidence Required for a TIVAD Lawsuit

To support your case, you will need:

• Medical records documenting your injuries
• Proof of the implantation procedure
• Records of device malfunctions
• Expert testimony linking the device to the complications
• Any communication with healthcare providers or regulatory authorities

Damages You Can Recover

Compensation from a TIVAD lawsuit may include:

• Medical expenses
• Lost wages
• Pain and suffering
• Other related costs depending on the severity of your injuries and their impact on your life

Statute of Limitations for TIVAD Lawsuits

The statute of limitations for filing a TIVAD lawsuit varies by state but typically ranges from one to three years from the date of injury or discovery of the defect. Some states follow a “discovery rule,” which allows the clock to start when the injury is discovered rather than when it occurred, potentially extending the filing window. Additionally, certain states may have separate deadlines for minors or other special circumstances that could affect your eligibility to file. Some jurisdictions also recognize a “discovery of harm” exception, which may pause the statute of limitations under specific conditions. Because statutes of limitations are strictly enforced and vary significantly by jurisdiction, it’s critical to consult with a qualified attorney in your state as soon as possible. Missing the applicable deadline can permanently bar your right to pursue compensation, regardless of the strength of your claim.

Many states also have “tolling” provisions that may suspend the statute of limitations in certain situations, such as when a plaintiff is legally incapacitated or when the defendant is out of state. An experienced attorney can help determine if any exceptions apply to your case and whether your state’s laws provide additional protections. Time is of the essence in these matters, as gathering medical records, establishing causation, and preparing your claim requires adequate preparation before any deadline expires. Additionally, some states impose shorter deadlines for claims against government entities or healthcare providers, making early legal consultation even more important to protect your rights. In some cases, particularly those involving injuries to children or vulnerable populations, additional tolling mechanisms may extend the filing window, underscoring the importance of early legal guidance.

Given the complexity of TIVAD cases and the varying procedural requirements across jurisdictions, prompt action following an injury can make a significant difference in your ability to recover damages and hold responsible parties accountable. State laws are periodically updated, and new court rulings may affect how statutes of limitations are applied in your jurisdiction. As of our latest review, several jurisdictions have introduced expanded provisions for plaintiffs in medical device cases, including extended filing deadlines for certain device-related injuries and special windows for previously time-barred claims. However, these laws continue to evolve, so verification with a legal professional is essential before concluding that your claim is too old to pursue. Federal regulations and FDA guidance may also influence state-level interpretations of device liability claims, adding another layer of complexity that underscores the need for timely legal consultation. It is worth noting that some states have implemented lookback windows or revival statutes that temporarily allow claims that would have otherwise expired to be refiled, so consulting an attorney promptly ensures you don’t miss any such opportunities in your jurisdiction.

The procedural requirements for filing a TIVAD lawsuit also vary by state, with some jurisdictions requiring plaintiffs to file a certificate of merit or submit medical expert affidavits before proceeding. These preliminary requirements can add time to the filing process and may impose their own deadlines, making it even more critical to contact an attorney early. Additionally, federal court filings under diversity jurisdiction may have different procedural rules than state court filings, and certain TIVAD cases may qualify for federal multidistrict litigation (MDL) consolidation. An attorney experienced in both state and federal medical device litigation can advise on the most advantageous forum for your claim and ensure all procedural prerequisites are met before any statutory deadlines expire. Some states also require notification to defendants within specific timeframes or mandate pre-suit settlement conferences, which can further compress your timeline for taking action. Given these multiple layers of procedural complexity, early consultation with a qualified TIVAD attorney is not merely advisable—it is essential to protecting your legal rights and maximizing your potential recovery.

It’s important to understand that while the typical statute of limitations window is one to three years, certain triggering events can reset or extend this timeline. For example, some states recognize a “wrongful concealment” doctrine that may extend the filing deadline if a manufacturer actively concealed knowledge of the defect. Additionally, if you received treatment for TIVAD complications years after implantation, the discovery rule in your state might allow you to file a lawsuit based on when the injury was diagnosed rather than when the device was implanted. Some states also recognize a “continuous treatment” doctrine, which may restart the statute of limitations clock each time a patient receives ongoing medical care related to the device injury, potentially providing additional filing opportunities. A few jurisdictions have also adopted “foreign-object” statutes that may extend deadlines for device-related claims in unique ways. These nuances make the difference between a viable claim and one that is time-barred, which is why documenting when you first learned of the injury or defect is critically important. An experienced TIVAD attorney can review your timeline and medical history to identify all applicable statute of limitations rules in your jurisdiction and ensure your claim is filed before any deadlines pass. In some jurisdictions, filing a claim in federal court or within an MDL proceeding may provide additional opportunities or different timeline considerations compared to state court, further emphasizing the need for prompt legal guidance tailored to your specific circumstances.

Additionally, it’s worth noting that many TIVAD plaintiffs discover their injuries long after implantation—sometimes years later when complications emerge or when medical professionals identify a connection between the device and their health problems. This delayed discovery is precisely why understanding your state’s discovery rule is essential, as it can be the difference between having a valid claim and being permanently time-barred. Some patients may not realize their symptoms are device-related until they receive a diagnosis during routine follow-up care or seek treatment for seemingly unrelated conditions. Keeping detailed medical records, including the date of implantation, dates of all follow-up appointments, and the dates you were first informed of any defects or complications, will be invaluable when working with your attorney to determine which statute of limitations applies to your specific situation. Recent legal developments have also made it increasingly important to track any communications from manufacturers regarding device safety concerns or recalls, as these communications can significantly impact the statute of limitations analysis in your case. Additionally, some jurisdictions now recognize that TIVAD-related injuries may have delayed manifestation periods—meaning complications can emerge or be diagnosed years after implantation—which has led certain courts and legislatures to reconsider traditional statute of limitations applications in device cases. This evolving legal landscape has resulted in some jurisdictions adopting more plaintiff-friendly approaches that account for the latent nature of certain device-related injuries, making it even more critical to discuss your specific situation with an attorney who stays current with these changing legal standards.

It’s also important to note that the statute of limitations for TIVAD lawsuits may be affected by when the defect or injury became reasonably discoverable through the exercise of reasonable diligence. Some courts have held that plaintiffs should have discovered device-related complications earlier based on medical knowledge available at the time, which could shorten your filing window in certain jurisdictions. Conversely, other courts have been more lenient, recognizing that TIVAD complications are often subtle and may not be immediately apparent even with appropriate medical attention. Manufacturer recalls, FDA warnings, or public health advisories regarding TIVAD devices can also serve as key triggering events that reset the statute of limitations clock in some jurisdictions, particularly under the “discovery rule.” Documenting your awareness—or lack thereof—of any such communications from the time of implantation onward can be crucial to your claim. Additionally, if you changed healthcare providers or experienced gaps in medical care, courts may consider how these gaps affected your opportunity to discover the device defect, potentially influencing statute of limitations calculations. These factual nuances underscore why consulting with an attorney who understands your specific medical and procedural timeline is essential to protecting your rights.

One critical development to monitor is how courts in your jurisdiction treat the interaction between statute of limitations rules and the timing of FDA safety communications. Some recent cases have established that an FDA warning or recall notice can serve as the triggering event for the statute of limitations in certain states, effectively resetting the clock when the agency formally notifies the public of device risks. This distinction matters because it means that even if you received your TIVAD implant years ago, a subsequent FDA warning about defects or complications could potentially extend your filing deadline in some jurisdictions. Additionally, manufacturers’ failure to promptly disclose known risks to patients or healthcare providers may be considered fraudulent concealment in some states, further extending applicable deadlines. It’s also worth noting that some jurisdictions have begun recognizing the concept of “equitable estoppel,” which may prevent manufacturers from benefiting from expired statutes of limitations when they have actively concealed information about device defects or risks from patients and healthcare providers. Several states have also passed legislation specifically addressing TIVAD device claims, imposing longer limitations periods or special considerations that diverge from general medical device liability timelines—a development that underscores the importance of reviewing your state’s current laws rather than relying on outdated information. These evolving interpretations highlight why the statute of

FAQs

1. What is a TIVAD totally implanted port?

TIVAD stands for Totally Implantable Venous Access Device, also known as Port-A-Cath. These devices are placed under the skin and connected to a vein via a catheter, allowing healthcare providers to easily administer medicines and transfusions to patients.

2. Who typically needs a TIVAD port?

TIVAD ports are highly recommended for those who require regular access to a vein for medication and/or therapy. They are most often implanted in cancer patients who require radiation therapy for treatment, as well as patients who need regular blood transfusions, blood draws, repeated blood samples, frequent dressings, antibiotic treatments, or other IV treatments.

3. What’s the problem with TIVAD implantable ports?

TIVAD totally implanted ports are made of silicone mixed with barium sulfate, so they can be viewed on an X-ray. The problem is that barium sulfate can reduce the strength of silicone over time, which can cause the implanted ports to break or leak.

4. What are the specific issues with Angioflow Power Ports?

Lawsuits allege that the locking mechanism between the Angioflow Power Port and the catheter has been found to leak in many patients. The manufacturer was allegedly aware of a design defect in the Vortex port which caused a high incidence of failure of the locking mechanism that secures the catheter to the stem of the injection port.

5. What is catheter separation in TIVAD ports?

Due to the alleged defect, the Vortex port has an increased risk that the catheter will separate from the injection port, causing medication and administered fluids to leak into the tissue of the silicone injection port implantation site during blood transfusions.

6. What are BioFlo Port flex fatigue issues?

Catheter fractures occur mainly due to a reduction in durability due to constant flexing – also known as flex fatigue. When this happens, the catheter typically breaks into multiple pieces and is swept throughout the circulatory system, potentially reaching the heart and lungs.

7. Who is liable for TIVAD lawsuit claims?

In cases involving TIVAD injuries, it is usually the manufacturer who is held responsible. Lawsuits allege that manufacturers have failed to implement safety measures that could prevent degradation from occurring over time, possibly in an effort to maximize profits and reduce costs.

8. Can I sue if I have been injured by a TIVAD?

Yes, you can sue if you have been injured by a TIVAD. You will need to provide evidence linking your injuries to the defective device and demonstrate how it has impacted your health and life.

9. Do I need a lawyer for a TIVAD lawsuit?

It is highly recommended to consult a knowledgeable lawyer prior to filing a TIVAD lawsuit. These cases are typically considered product liability, and are incredibly difficult to litigate, requiring considerable experience to prevail successfully. A lawyer with experience in product liability cases can help perform all litigation on your behalf to ensure you receive maximum compensation.

10. How can I get help with my TIVAD lawsuit?

The Medical Device Litigation Group is an experienced team of trial lawyers that focus on the representation of plaintiffs in TIVAD lawsuits. They are handling individual litigation nationwide and currently accepting new potential injury and death cases on behalf of patients in all 50 states.

Get a Free TIVAD Lawsuit Evaluation With Our Lawyers

Time is limited to pursue legal action in TIVAD lawsuits, with statutes of limitations typically ranging from one to three years depending on your state. Don’t delay in seeking the justice and compensation you deserve.

Our services include:

• Free, confidential consultations
• No upfront costs or fees
• Payment only if we win your case

References

1. https://www.leadingjustice.net/product-liability-lawsuits/port-a-cath/
2. https://www.rwblawyers.com/practice-areas/implanted-ports
3. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/cdrh_docs/pdf6/K062414.pdf