Nobody chooses a port. It is offered as the sensible option: one small implant under the skin of the chest, one catheter threaded to a large vein, and every infusion, blood draw, and contrast scan runs through it instead of through your arm. For a person facing months of chemotherapy, that is a real kindness.
More than 3,700 people have now filed federal lawsuits alleging the Bard PowerPort delivered something else. Their accounts, drawn from court filings and testimony in this year’s bellwether trials, share a pattern that patients and their families recognize immediately.
How patients describe it
The symptom that didn't fit. Chest pain, an irregular heartbeat, a fever that came out of nowhere. Because the patient was already in treatment, the symptom was easy to attribute to the cancer or the chemo. Some describe weeks before anyone looked at the port.
The scan. An X-ray or CT showing the catheter had fractured, with a fragment traveling toward or into the heart — or a blood infection traced to the device. In the second bellwether trial, the plaintiff's catheter broke off and lodged in her heart.
The surgery you didn't plan for. Retrieving a fragment from the heart or pulmonary artery, removing an infected port, and placing a new access device — all while the underlying treatment waits.
On September 4, 2026, an Arizona jury awarded $40 million to a patient whose PowerPort catheter fractured and migrated to her heart. It was the first plaintiff verdict in the litigation, and the jury found both a design defect and a failure to warn.
Direct2Attorney · Litigation UpdateWhat the lawsuits say went wrong
The design claim
Core allegation- Catheter made from polyurethane mixed with barium sulfate for X-ray visibility
- Barium particles alleged to degrade the tubing over time
- Microfractures allow bacteria to colonize and the tube to crack
- Alternative designs allegedly available
The warning claim
Secondary allegation- Fracture and infection rates allegedly known internally
- Adverse event reports allegedly not reflected in labeling
- Physicians not told to monitor for degradation
- Verdicts so far are split on this theory
The part that is hardest to talk about
Patients describe a particular kind of anger: the device injury interrupted cancer treatment, sometimes by months. Delayed chemotherapy, a lost treatment window, a second and third surgery on a body already worn down. Families describe the exhaustion of managing a lawsuit-worthy injury on top of a diagnosis. That exhaustion is precisely why these claims tend to be handled by firms that do the heavy lifting, and why the first step is deliberately small.
What this means if you're considering a claim
If you had a Bard PowerPort (or a Bard port catheter under another name) and experienced a catheter fracture, migration, blood clot, or serious infection requiring treatment or removal, a claim may exist. The MDL is accepting new cases, and two more bellwether trials are scheduled for October and December 2026. A free review confirms the device, the injury, and your state’s deadline.
Injured by a Bard PowerPort?
Free, confidential review. No upfront cost, no obligation.
Common Questions
Your surgical or implant record will name the device, and many patients received a wallet card. A participating firm can obtain records if you don’t have them.
Possibly not. Deadlines often run from when the injury was discovered or connected to the device. An attorney licensed in your state can confirm.
No. Bellwether verdicts inform settlement discussions but each case is valued on its own injuries. There is no global settlement yet.
If you have a documented injury such as fracture, infection, or thrombosis, yes. Do not remove a device solely for a lawsuit; follow your physician’s advice.
No. Direct2Attorney’s review is free, and participating law firms typically work on contingency, meaning fees are generally paid only if there is a recovery. Confirm fee terms in writing with the firm.
