Bard PowerPort Catheter Lawsuit
Last Updated: August 6, 2026
Claims allege that Bard PowerPort implanted port catheters fractured, migrated, or caused infections and blood clots. Federal cases are consolidated in MDL 3081 in the D. Ariz.
The Bard PowerPort is an implanted port catheter used for long-term intravenous treatment. Lawsuits allege the catheter was prone to fracture and migration, and that patients suffered infections, blood clots, and cardiac injuries as a result. Federal cases are consolidated in MDL 3081 in the D. Ariz. before Judge David G. Campbell. The first bellwether trial was tried in April 2026. NuLegal reviews these claims at no cost and connects qualified claimants with trial counsel handling this litigation.
What a Bard PowerPort Is
An implanted port is a small reservoir placed under the skin, usually in the upper chest, with a thin flexible catheter threaded into a large vein near the heart. It gives clinicians repeated access to the bloodstream without a new needle stick into a peripheral vein each time. Ports are commonly placed for chemotherapy, long courses of antibiotics, intravenous nutrition, and frequent blood draws.
The Bard PowerPort family is manufactured and distributed by C. R. Bard, Inc., Bard Access Systems, Inc., and Becton, Dickinson and Company. The devices are "power injectable," meaning they are rated to withstand the high-pressure contrast injection used in CT imaging.
The lawsuits allege that the polyurethane catheter material used in these devices — a barium sulfate compound intended to make the catheter visible on imaging — was prone to degrading in the body. Plaintiffs allege that degradation left the catheter more likely to crack, fracture, or separate, and more hospitable to bacterial colonization. These are allegations being litigated; they have not been established as fact, and the first case tried to verdict resulted in a defense verdict on the warning and consumer-fraud claims.
Because a port sits in a central vein, a fragment that breaks free does not stay put. It can travel toward the heart or the pulmonary arteries, which is why a suspected fracture is treated as urgent.
Injuries Reported in These Claims
These are the complication types the filed cases center on. If you experienced one of them after a PowerPort was implanted, the screening below will walk through the details that matter.
Catheter Fracture
The port's catheter tubing cracks or breaks apart inside the body, sometimes releasing fragments into the bloodstream.
Common signs
- Sudden chest, neck, or shoulder pain
- Swelling around the port site
- Irregular heartbeat or palpitations
- Difficulty flushing or drawing from the port
- Shortness of breath
How it is diagnosed: Chest X-ray, CT imaging, or fluoroscopy showing a separated or fragmented catheter.
Severity: Emergency — a migrated fragment may require interventional retrieval or open surgery.
Device Migration
The catheter or a fractured piece of it moves out of position, traveling toward the heart or pulmonary arteries.
Common signs
- Chest pain or pressure
- Heart palpitations or arrhythmia
- Shortness of breath
- Port that no longer flushes or draws
- Pain radiating to the neck or jaw
How it is diagnosed: Imaging (X-ray, CT, or echocardiogram) locating the device outside its implanted position.
Severity: Emergency — migration to the heart or lungs can be life-threatening.
Infection or Sepsis
Bloodstream infection associated with the implanted port, which in severe cases progresses to sepsis.
Common signs
- Fever and chills
- Redness, warmth, or drainage at the port site
- Rapid heart rate
- Confusion or disorientation
- Low blood pressure
How it is diagnosed: Blood cultures, catheter-tip culture, and clinical sepsis criteria.
Severity: Emergency — sepsis is life-threatening and usually requires device removal plus IV antibiotics.
Thrombosis or Blood Clot
A clot forming on or around the catheter, which can obstruct the vein or break loose and travel to the lungs.
Common signs
- Swelling of the arm, neck, or face on the port side
- Arm or shoulder pain
- Visible enlarged surface veins
- Shortness of breath
- Chest pain worsening with breathing
How it is diagnosed: Doppler ultrasound or CT venogram; CT pulmonary angiography where embolism is suspected.
Severity: Serious to emergency — pulmonary embolism is life-threatening.
Cardiac or Pulmonary Injury
Perforation, laceration, arrhythmia, or effusion caused by the catheter or a migrated fragment contacting the heart or lung.
Common signs
- Chest pain
- Irregular or racing heartbeat
- Shortness of breath
- Fainting or lightheadedness
- Low blood pressure
How it is diagnosed: Echocardiogram, CT imaging, or cardiac catheterization.
Severity: Emergency — perforation and tamponade require immediate surgical management.
Where the Litigation Stands
Federal Bard PowerPort cases were centralized by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation as In re: Bard Implanted Port Catheter Products Liability Litigation. Consolidation groups cases before one judge for shared pretrial work; it is a case-management step and not a ruling on whether any claim has merit.
Consolidation
MDL 3081
Court
D. Ariz.
Presiding Judge
Judge David G. Campbell
The court selected six bellwether cases for trial — three infection claims, two thrombosis claims, and one fracture claim. The first bellwether was tried in Phoenix in April 2026. The jury found for the defense on the failure-to-warn and consumer-fraud claims and did not reach a verdict on the design-defect claim. Further bellwether trials are scheduled through early 2027.
Bellwether trials are test cases. They give both sides information about how juries respond to a representative set of facts. A bellwether result does not decide any other claimant's case, and it does not establish what any individual claim is worth.
What a Review Looks At
These are the facts that decide whether a claim fits the current filings. If you are unsure about any of them, say so on the form — an unknown answer routes the file to a person rather than closing it.
A PowerPort-family device was implanted
You had a Bard PowerPort or another port in the PowerPort family surgically implanted. If you are not sure of the brand, your implanting hospital's operative report will name it.
A complication occurred
The port fractured, migrated, caused an infection or sepsis, caused a blood clot, or caused a cardiac or pulmonary injury.
It required medical attention
The complication led to treatment, device removal or replacement, or a hospital admission. This is what separates a documented injury from a device that simply stopped working.
The dates and records can be identified
Roughly when the port was placed and when the complication happened, and whether the medical records connecting the two can be obtained. Approximate dates are fine at this stage.
Check If You Qualify
A few questions about the device and what happened. Nothing you answer here creates an attorney-client relationship.
Was a Bard PowerPort or another implanted port placed in your chest or arm?
Bard PowerPort FAQ
Which devices are involved in the Bard PowerPort litigation?
The litigation involves Bard PowerPort implantable port catheter systems, including the PowerPort isp, PowerPort ClearVUE, PowerPort SlimPort, and other models in the PowerPort family. These are surgically implanted vascular access devices used to deliver chemotherapy, antibiotics, nutrition, and other long-term intravenous treatments. Claims allege that the catheter material was prone to fracturing and degrading inside the body.
What injuries are alleged in these cases?
The claims center on catheter fracture, migration of the device or a broken fragment, bloodstream infection and sepsis, thrombosis and blood clots, and cardiac or pulmonary injury such as perforation or arrhythmia. The injury generally has to have occurred after the port was implanted and required medical attention, such as treatment, device removal, or hospitalization.
Where are the Bard PowerPort cases consolidated?
Federal Bard PowerPort cases are consolidated as In re: Bard Implanted Port Catheter Products Liability Litigation, MDL 3081, in the D. Ariz. before Judge David G. Campbell. Consolidation is a case-management step that groups cases for shared pretrial proceedings; it is not a finding about the merits of any individual claim.
What stage is the litigation at?
The first bellwether trial was tried in Phoenix in April 2026. The jury returned a defense verdict on the failure-to-warn and consumer-fraud claims and did not reach a verdict on the design-defect claim. Additional bellwether trials are scheduled through early 2027. Bellwether trials are test cases that help the parties evaluate the wider group of claims; their results do not determine any other claimant's case.
Do I need to have had the port removed to be reviewed?
No. Removal is not required for a case review. Whether the device was removed, replaced, or is still implanted is one of the questions the screening asks, because it affects what medical records exist and whether the device itself may be available. If the port is still in place, any decision about removal is a medical one to make with your doctor, not a legal one.
What does a case review cost?
Nothing. NuLegal's case review is free and carries no obligation. NuLegal reviews the claim and, where it qualifies, connects the claimant with trial counsel handling this litigation. Submitting the form does not create an attorney-client relationship.
Filing Deadlines by State
Statutes of limitations vary by state. Select your state to see the filing deadlines and court information that apply to a Bard PowerPort claim there.
Alabama
SOL: 2 years
Alaska
SOL: 2 years
Arizona
SOL: 2 years
Arkansas
SOL: 3 years
California
SOL: 2 years
Colorado
SOL: 2 years
Connecticut
SOL: 2 years
Delaware
SOL: 2 years
District of Columbia
SOL: 3 years
Florida
SOL: 2 years
Georgia
SOL: 2 years
Hawaii
SOL: 2 years
Idaho
SOL: 2 years
Illinois
SOL: 2 years
Indiana
SOL: 2 years
Iowa
SOL: 2 years
Kansas
SOL: 2 years
Kentucky
SOL: 1 year
Louisiana
SOL: 1 year
Maine
SOL: 6 years
Maryland
SOL: 3 years
Massachusetts
SOL: 3 years
Michigan
SOL: 3 years
Minnesota
SOL: 2 years
Mississippi
SOL: 3 years
Missouri
SOL: 5 years
Montana
SOL: 3 years
Nebraska
SOL: 4 years
Nevada
SOL: 2 years
New Hampshire
SOL: 3 years
New Jersey
SOL: 2 years
New Mexico
SOL: 3 years
New York
SOL: 3 years
North Carolina
SOL: 3 years
North Dakota
SOL: 6 years
Ohio
SOL: 2 years
Oklahoma
SOL: 2 years
Oregon
SOL: 2 years
Pennsylvania
SOL: 2 years
Rhode Island
SOL: 3 years
South Carolina
SOL: 3 years
South Dakota
SOL: 3 years
Tennessee
SOL: 1 year
Texas
SOL: 2 years
Utah
SOL: 4 years
Vermont
SOL: 3 years
Virginia
SOL: 2 years
Washington
SOL: 3 years
West Virginia
SOL: 2 years
Wisconsin
SOL: 3 years
Wyoming
SOL: 4 years
Don't Wait
Statutes of limitations may limit how long you have to bring a claim. A free, no-obligation review takes a few minutes and tells you whether your claim fits the current filings.
Free Case ReviewAdvertisement
Disclosure: NuLegal operates as a legal referral service. Attorney Ashkaan Hassan evaluates claims and refers qualified cases to specialized trial firms, earning a referral fee from the attorney's share of any recovery. Clients never pay out of pocket.