Abbott Spinal Cord Stimulator Lawsuit

Abbott spinal cord stimulator lawsuits allege that certain implanted pain-management systems malfunctioned, failed to provide pain relief, or caused new injuries after implantation.

Current spinal cord stimulator claims involve Abbott systems such as Proclaim XR, Proclaim Plus, and Eterna. Plaintiffs allege problems including lead migration, loss of stimulation, painful electrical shocks, communication failures, battery issues, and other abnormal device behavior.

Some lawsuits allege that design or manufacturing defects caused an Abbott device to perform differently from the temporary system used during the trial period.

A patient may experience meaningful relief during the trial but later develop severe pain, loss of therapeutic benefit, or worsening chronic pain after receiving the permanent implant.

When reprogramming does not correct the problem, patients may require revision procedures, replacement of individual components, or complete device removal.

Some plaintiffs allege that complications from a defective device resulted in multiple surgeries, extended recovery, infection, or permanent physical limitations.

Other claims involve alleged neurological injuries.

Lead movement, unintended stimulation, or complications during device use may allegedly cause nerve damage, weakness, numbness, burning sensations, or pain that radiates beyond the original treatment area.

Plaintiffs also allege that Abbott introduced modified spinal cord stimulation systems without adequate testing or sufficient warnings about the risk of device failure.

Some complaints question whether the company properly evaluated design, software, battery, programming, and hardware changes before the devices reached patients.

The lawsuits may include claims for:

• Defective design
• Manufacturing defects
• Failure to warn
• Negligence
• Misrepresentation
• Breach of warranty
• Alleged violations of federal medical device requirements

Abbott may dispute these allegations and argue that a patient’s symptoms resulted from the underlying pain condition, the implantation procedure, or another medical cause.

The Abbott litigation is part of broader scrutiny involving the medical device industry and the development, approval, marketing, and monitoring of implanted spinal cord stimulators.

Similar product liability theories appear in other lawsuits against companies like Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Nevro, although each manufacturer’s devices and regulatory history involve separate factual questions.

Spinal cord stimulator lawsuits are generally pursued as defective medical device claims rather than traditional medical malpractice cases.

The strength of an Abbott spinal cord stimulator lawsuit depends on the exact system implanted, the timing and severity of the complications, records of reprogramming or hardware failure, and whether medical evidence connects the device to the patient’s injuries.

TorHoerman Law is reviewing claims involving Abbott spinal cord stimulator devices for patients who experienced complications after spinal cord stimulator implantation.

If you or a loved one experienced complications following spinal cord stimulator surgery, you may be eligible to pursue compensation through an Abbott Spinal Cord Stimulator Lawsuit.

Contact TorHoerman Law for a free consultation.

Use the chatbot on this page for a free case review and to get in touch with our spinal cord stimulator lawyers.

Abbott Spinal Cord Stimulator Lawsuit Status

On June 22, 2026, plaintiffs filed a separate motion seeking to centralize federal Abbott spinal cord stimulator lawsuits in MDL 3194.

The request remains pending, meaning Abbott claims continue to proceed individually unless the JPML orders coordinated pretrial proceedings.

An Abbott MDL would not be a class action.

Each plaintiff would retain an individual lawsuit based on the Abbott device implanted, the complications experienced, and the resulting damages.

A spinal cord stimulator is intended to alter pain signals before they reach the brain, but spinal cord stimulator complications can allegedly develop when the system does not function properly in real-world use.

For some patients, the problem is a loss of significant pain relief after implantation, while others report worsening pain, abnormal stimulation, or symptoms that were not present before the device was placed.

In reported spinal cord stimulator lawsuits, plaintiffs have described problems involving device migration, charging or battery failure, repeated reprogramming, and MRI-mode issues that complicated future treatment decisions.

A defective spinal cord stimulator may also allegedly produce painful shocks, irregular sensations, or inconsistent spinal cord stimulation that affects the patient’s ability to manage chronic pain.

When that happens, the device may stop serving its intended purpose for conditions such as chronic pain or complex regional pain syndrome.

In more serious cases, patients may face infection, nerve irritation, or other spinal cord stimulator injury allegations that lead to additional procedures.

Some people require revision surgery to reposition or replace components, while others undergo explant surgery to remove the cord stimulator entirely.

These complications can disrupt recovery, increase medical costs, and leave patients dealing with the consequences of another invasive procedure after an initial spinal cord stimulator surgery.

Because these are implanted medical devices placed near the spinal cord, even a limited malfunction can create substantial treatment concerns and, in some cases, severe injuries.

Complications commonly alleged in cases involving spinal cord stimulator manufacturers and defective medical device claims include:

• Worsening pain after spinal cord stimulator implantation
• Loss of pain relief or failure to maintain therapeutic benefit
• Device migration or lead movement requiring corrective treatment
• Painful shocks, jolting sensations, or unintended stimulation
• Abnormal tingling, burning, or other irregular sensations
• Infection at the implant site or surrounding tissue
• Nerve irritation or other spinal cord injuries
• Battery failure, charging problems, or premature loss of function
• MRI-mode issues or imaging-related device problems
• Repeated reprogramming appointments with limited improvement
• Revision surgery to reposition, repair, or replace the system
• Explant surgery to remove a defective medical device

Abbott manufactures spinal cord stimulation systems intended to treat chronic intractable pain when medication, surgery, physical therapy, and other treatments have not provided sufficient relief.

During a spinal cord stimulator operation, electrical leads are positioned in the epidural space near the spinal cord and connected to an implantable pulse generator placed beneath the skin.

Once the spinal cord stimulator is installed, the system delivers programmed electrical impulses intended to alter how pain signals are transmitted to the brain.

Patients typically complete a temporary trial before receiving a permanent spinal cord stimulator.

Abbott systems differ in battery type, rechargeability, stimulation patterns, programming capabilities, and MRI compatibility.

Abbott spinal cord stimulation systems include:

• Prodigy
• Proclaim Elite
• Proclaim XR
• Proclaim Plus
• Eterna

Older records may identify Advanced Neuromodulation Systems or St. Jude Medical because Abbott acquired companies that previously developed and marketed parts of its spinal cord stimulation product line.

Spinal cord stimulators are Class III medical devices subject to FDA premarket approval.

Like other medical device manufacturers, Abbott has introduced later models and design changes through supplements to earlier approvals.

Lawsuits allege that some changes were not adequately tested or accompanied by sufficient warnings, although Abbott disputes liability in individual cases.

Numerous lawsuits have been filed involving Abbott spinal cord stimulators.

Plaintiffs have reported lead migration, painful stimulation, loss of therapeutic benefit, controller communication problems, battery issues, and complications requiring reprogramming, revision surgery, or device removal.

More than 80,000 injury reports involving spinal cord stimulators have been submitted to the FDA.

That figure covers devices made by multiple manufacturers and does not establish that an Abbott device caused any particular injury.

FDA adverse event reports may be incomplete, duplicated, or based on unverified information.

Identifying the exact model is important when evaluating a potential claim.

If a patient had an Abbott spinal cord stimulator implanted, the model and serial number may appear on the implant card, operative report, device packaging stickers, or follow-up pain-management records.

You may qualify for an Abbott spinal cord stimulator lawsuit if you received an Abbott device and later developed serious complications beyond your underlying chronic back pain or other treated condition.

Potential claims may involve lead migration, painful electrical shocks, infection, loss of pain relief, nerve injury, or device malfunction.

A claim may be stronger when the complications required revision surgery, replacement, or complete removal of the implanted system.

Attorneys reviewing spinal cord stimulator litigation will examine the exact Abbott model, when symptoms began, and whether medical records connect the device to the reported injury.

Although modern spinal cord stimulators can help some patients, a manufacturer may be liable when a defective device or inadequate warning causes additional harm.

If you had an Abbott spinal cord stimulator installed, preserve your implant card, operative report, imaging, programming history, and follow-up treatment records.

Evidence of repeated reprogramming, abnormal device behavior, or additional surgery may help support a potential claim.

Eligibility ultimately depends on the device involved, the severity of the complications, the available medical evidence, and the filing deadline that applies.

Gathering Evidence for a Spinal Cord Stimulator Lawsuit

Evidence in Abbott medical device litigation should identify the implanted system, document how it performed, and connect the alleged malfunction to the patient’s injuries.

The most useful materials often include the original operative report, implant card, follow-up records, imaging, and programming history.

Records from revision surgery or device removal may also explain what failed and why additional treatment was required.

Potential evidence may include:

• Operative reports from the original implantation procedure
• Implant records identifying the Abbott device used
• The patient device card
• Model and serial number information
• Records from the spinal cord stimulator trial, if one occurred
• Follow-up treatment notes after implantation
• Programming and reprogramming history
• Imaging showing lead migration or other hardware issues
• MRI-related records, restrictions, or mode-related issues
• Revision surgery records
• Explant or removal surgery records
• Notes describing new and worsening pain after implantation
• Infection records or wound-care documentation
• A pain and symptom diary tracking daily limitations and symptoms
• Employment or activity records showing functional decline after complications

Damages in Spinal Stimulator Lawsuits

Damages in an Abbott spinal stimulator lawsuit may include compensation for medical expenses, lost income, physical pain, emotional distress, and reduced quality of life.

Claims involving revision surgery, device removal, permanent nerve pain, or ongoing chronic nerve pain may have greater potential value.

The amount available depends on the severity of the injury, the treatment required, and the long-term effect on the patient’s ability to work and complete daily activities.

Past spinal cord stimulator verdicts and settlements do not guarantee a particular outcome because each claim depends on its own medical evidence and damages.

Potential damages may include:

• Past medical expenses
• Future medical expenses
• Costs of revision surgery
• Costs of removal or explant surgery
• Costs of corrective spinal surgery
• Lost income
• Reduced earning capacity
• Physical pain
• Emotional distress
• Disability or physical impairment
• Reduced quality of life
• Out-of-pocket treatment and rehabilitation costs

TorHoerman Law is reviewing spinal cord stimulator cases involving Abbott devices that allegedly caused painful stimulation, lead migration, loss of therapy, infection, nerve injury, or the need for revision surgery or device removal.

Our attorneys evaluate the device involved, the patient’s medical records, the timing of the complications, and the treatment required after implantation.

If you or a loved one suffered serious complications after receiving an Abbott spinal cord stimulator, you may be eligible to pursue compensation.

Contact TorHoerman Law for a free consultation.

Use the chatbot on this page for a free case review and to find out if you qualify instantly.