The Bard PowerPort is an implantable venous access device — a small port placed under the skin, typically in the chest — that allows medical professionals to administer chemotherapy, draw blood, and deliver medications without repeated needle sticks. Millions of patients have received PowerPort devices since C.R. Bard introduced them in the 1990s. The devices are especially common among cancer patients who require long-term intravenous access. Beginning in the early 2010s, patients, physicians, and researchers began documenting a disturbing pattern: the polyurethane catheter tubing attached to the port was fracturing inside the body. Fragments of the catheter — sometimes several centimeters long — were entering the bloodstream and migrating toward the heart and lungs. The resulting complications range from serious to fatal: cardiac perforation, cardiac tamponade, pulmonary embolism, sepsis, and endocarditis. Becton Dickinson (BD) acquired C.R. Bard in 2017 for $24 billion, inheriting both the PowerPort product line and the mounting litigation. In 2022, a federal multidistrict litigation was established in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona to consolidate cases nationwide. Legal claims proceed under theories of design defect, manufacturing defect, failure to warn, and negligence.
From the docket
Litigation Timeline
- June 2026
FDA Issues Multiple Class I Recalls for Arrow International Vascular Access Kitsregulatory
The FDA classified multiple Arrow International, LLC vascular access kits — including PICC, hemodialysis, and CVC kits — under Class I recalls after Lidocaine, Bupivacaine, and 0.9% sodium chloride from a supplier with documented quality issues were incorporated into the products. The FDA noted limited reports of drug ineffectiveness and warned that compromised sterility of a water-based injectable product could lead to serious adverse health consequences. These recalls were detected on June 30, 2026.
- June 2026
FDA Class I Recall Issued for Arrow International Kits Over Drug Quality Concernsregulatory
The FDA issued a Class I recall against Arrow International, LLC after kits and sets were found to contain drugs — including Lidocaine, Bupivacaine, and 0.9% sodium chloride — sourced from a supplier with identified quality issues. The agency noted limited reports of drug ineffectiveness and warned that compromised sterility in a water-based injectable product could lead to serious health consequences. This recall was detected on June 30, 2026.
- After Diagnosis
Surgical Retrieval and Lawsuit Filedlegal
Interventional radiologists or cardiothoracic surgeons perform fragment retrieval via cardiac catheterization or open surgery. Following recovery, patients and families are increasingly aware of the PowerPort MDL and consult personal injury attorneys specializing in medical device litigation. Attorneys obtain implant records, operative reports, imaging studies, pathology specimens, and device serial number information to verify the PowerPort model and lot. Cases are filed in federal district court and transferred to MDL 3:22-md-03062 in the District of Arizona. The case enters the MDL pretrial process, including the plaintiff fact sheet process, general causation expert disclosure, and the bellwether trial selection process.
- At Diagnosis
Imaging Reveals Fractured Catheter with Migrated Fragmentslegal
Chest X-ray obtained for another purpose, or targeted imaging when catheter malfunction is suspected, reveals a radiodense fragment at an unexpected location — the right heart, pulmonary artery, or peripheral pulmonary vasculature. A CT of the chest or fluoroscopic evaluation confirms the fragment's position and determines whether percutaneous retrieval is feasible. At this point the treating physician contacts interventional radiology or cardiac surgery. This imaging date is critical for legal purposes: it is typically when the discovery rule clock begins to run on the statute of limitations, and it marks the start of the patient's informed awareness that a product defect may have caused their injuries.
- Variable — Weeks to Years After Fracture
Patient Presents with Symptoms — Chest Pain, Shortness of Breath, or Infectionmedical
Many patients first present with symptoms that are not immediately linked to the PowerPort. Chest pain, shortness of breath, recurrent fevers, and unexplained bloodstream infections may be attributed to the patient's underlying cancer, post-treatment effects, or unrelated cardiac or pulmonary conditions. This attribution delay is one of the most medically and legally significant aspects of PowerPort cases — it extends the period before the catheter defect is identified and it can delay the start of the statute of limitations under the discovery rule. Some patients are told their recurrent infections have "no identifiable source" until catheter fracture is eventually identified.
- Months to Years After Implantation
Catheter Silently Fractures Over Timemedical
With no pain, no warning, and no external sign, the polyurethane catheter tubing develops microscopic cracks from environmental stress cracking at anatomical pinch points — typically where the catheter passes beneath the clavicle or is anchored at the port body. Over weeks to months, cyclical mechanical stress and lipid absorption cause the crack to propagate through the full thickness of the catheter wall. A segment of tubing fractures completely and detaches. The fragment enters the venous circulation and is swept by blood flow toward the heart. The patient goes about daily life entirely unaware that a foreign body is now traveling through their vascular system.
- At Implantation
PowerPort Implanted for Chemotherapy or Long-Term IV Accessmedical
The Bard PowerPort catheter is surgically implanted by a vascular surgeon or interventional radiologist, typically in an outpatient or short-stay setting. The port reservoir is placed beneath the skin of the upper chest, and the polyurethane catheter is threaded through the subclavian or jugular vein into the superior vena cava near the right atrium. Patients are told the device will provide convenient, reliable venous access for the duration of their treatment — often months to years. The implanting physician and patient are rarely if ever informed by Bard or BD of the polyurethane degradation risk or the possibility of catheter fracture and intravascular fragment migration.
Stay informed
Get free updates on the Bard PowerPort Catheter litigation as it develops
No phone call required. We will email you when there is meaningful news — new filings, settlements, or important deadlines.
Full case details
Want the complete picture?
View eligibility criteria, settlement information, scientific evidence, and start a free case review.
View the full Bard PowerPort Catheter case page →