Nevro spinal cord stimulator lawsuits involve allegations that certain Senza, Senza II, Senza Omnia, and HFX systems caused serious complications after implantation.
These spinal cord stimulator implants are intended to relieve chronic nerve pain when treatments such as pain medications, physical therapy, or prior surgery have not provided adequate relief.
Each system uses electrical leads connected to an implantable pulse generator that delivers stimulation near the spinal cord.
The therapy is intended to reduce pain by altering or interrupting pain signals before they are fully processed by the brain.
Some plaintiffs allege that their permanent Nevro device performed differently from the temporary trial system and later caused painful stimulation, loss of therapy, weakness, or nerve damage.
Current medical device litigation involving defective SCS devices examines whether Nevro complied with federal manufacturing, reporting, testing, and post-market safety requirements.
Other claims involve an alleged failure to adequately warn patients and physicians about device malfunctions, repeated reprogramming, revision surgery, or device removal.
Additional allegations in Nevro spinal cord stimulator lawsuits include:
- Devices that allegedly malfunctioned or performed differently from their approved design
- Failure to adequately test certain device changes before they reached patients
- Failure to warn patients and physicians about known risks and complications
- Failure to properly report or investigate adverse events
- Misrepresentations about expected pain relief or the performance of the permanent implant
- Inadequate training of Nevro representatives who assisted with programming
- Representatives recommending or changing stimulation settings that affected patient treatment
- Lead, electrical output, remote-control, or communication problems
- Concealment or omission of important safety information
Patients may require repeated reprogramming, multiple revision procedures, or complete removal of the implanted system when complications cannot be corrected.
Nevro and its parent company, Globus Medical, may dispute the allegations and argue that a patient’s symptoms resulted from the underlying medical condition, implantation procedure, or another cause.
The viability of an individual lawsuit depends on the exact Nevro system implanted, the medical evidence connecting it to the injury, and the treatment required afterward.
Nevro Spinal Cord Stimulator Lawsuit Status
The U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation has not combined Nevro spinal cord stimulator lawsuits into a single MDL.
Plaintiffs filed a motion on June 26, 2026, asking the JPML to create proposed MDL 3195, while a separate request for an Abbott spinal cord stimulator MDL was filed four days earlier.
In June 2026, the JPML established Boston Scientific MDL 3181 but declined to create one industrywide proceeding involving all spinal cord stimulator manufacturers.
An MDL places similar federal lawsuits before one judge to coordinate discovery, expert evidence, motions, and other pretrial proceedings.
If the Nevro request is granted, the federal cases would be transferred for coordinated pretrial management, but each patient who suffered complications would retain an individual lawsuit based on their injuries and damages.
If the JPML denies the motion, the Nevro lawsuits will continue separately in the federal courts where they were filed.
