• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe

MassDevice

The Medical Device Business Journal — Medical Device News & Articles | MassDevice

  • Latest News
  • Technologies
    • Artificial Intelligence (AI)
    • Cardiovascular
    • Orthopedics
    • Neurological
    • Diabetes
    • Surgical Robotics
  • Business & Finance
    • Wall Street Beat
    • Earnings Reports
    • Funding Roundup
    • Mergers & Acquisitions
    • Initial Public Offering (IPO)
    • Legal News
    • Personnel Moves
    • Medtech 100 Stock Index
  • Regulatory & Compliance
    • Food & Drug Administration (FDA)
    • Recalls
    • 510(k)
    • Pre-Market Approval (PMA)
    • MDSAP
    • Clinical Trials
  • Special Content
    • Special Reports
    • In-Depth Coverage
    • DeviceTalks
  • Podcasts
    • MassDevice Fast Five
    • DeviceTalks Weekly
    • OEM Talks
      • AbbottTalks
      • Boston ScientificTalks
      • DeviceTalks AI
      • IntuitiveTalks
      • MedtechWOMEN Talks
      • MedtronicTalks
      • Neuro Innovation Talks
      • Ortho Innovation Talks
      • Structural Heart Talks
      • StrykerTalks
  • Resources
    • About MassDevice
    • DeviceTalks
    • Newsletter Signup
    • Leadership in Medtech
    • Manufacturers & Suppliers Search
    • MedTech100 Index
    • Videos
    • Webinars
    • Whitepapers
    • Voices
Home » Abbott still on the hook in stent off-label marketing lawsuit

Abbott still on the hook in stent off-label marketing lawsuit

January 18, 2013 By MassDevice staff

legal gavel

A Texas judge this week ruled to let medical device makers Johnson & Johnson (NYSE:JNJ) and Boston Scientific (NYSE:BSX) off the hook but backed the case against healthcare giant Abbott (NYSE:ABT) in a lawsuit accusing the companies of engaging in illegal marketing of their stents.

The whistleblower lawsuit, originally filed in 2006 by Kevin Colquitt, claimed that all 3 companies "conducted the off-label, unlawful marketing of biliary stents for many years," according to court documents.

The lawsuit further accused the defendant companies "and others in the market" of pursuing a common "scheme" to illegally market their biliary stents for peripheral treatments.

"They followed a relatively easy FDA pathway and received approval to market these stents for ‘biliary’ use," according to the complaint. "Yet, they have almost entirely ignored this approved use in their marketing; instead, marketing stents to the manifestly larger (99% of sales) ‘peripheral’ market."

The lawsuit claimed that device makers don’t pursue peripheral labeling for their devices because it’s more costly and time consuming, as well as more uncertain than aiming for a biliary indication.

The complaint further claimed that 99% of the stents physicians use to treat lesions in the peripheral vascular are only indicated for use in biliary structures, and that "many of the stents with a [malignant biliary stricture] indication are manufactured in configuration of diameter and length that would make it impossible for them to be placed in any human biliary duct."

The accusations seemed to surpass the realm of False Claims Act violations and take an almost conspiratorial tone, with Colquitt claiming that the medical device industry "banks heavily" on the "objective fact that [the] vast majority of biliary stents are being marketed and used in an off-label fashion."

The lawsuit estimated that Guidant (a one-time Abbott subsidiary later acquired by Boston Scientific for more than $26 billion), Johnson & Johnson subsidiary Cordis (which exited the stent market entirely in 2011) and Boston Scientific collectively represent $1.4 billion in peripheral/biliary stent sales from 2003 through 2005. The lawsuit further estimates that $900 million of that paid for stents used for non-approved treatments, and that Medicare and Medicaid paid for 80% of those procedures.

U.S. District Judge Barbara Lynn ruled this week to dismiss the lawsuits against Boston Scientific and Johnson & Johnson and its Cordis subsidiary, with prejudice, but allowed the case against Abbott to proceed.

Filed Under: Legal News, News Well, Stents Tagged With: Abbott, Boston Scientific, Cordis Corp., Guidant Corp., Johnson and Johnson

More recent news

  • Medtronic reports first patient treated in study of multi-organ denervation for hypertension
  • Baxter turns to an automation company for its new CEO
  • Pristine Surgical appoints new CFO
  • Boston Scientific wins expanded FDA nod for Farapulse PFA
  • FDA warns on issue with J&J Abiomed pump controllers related to 3 deaths

Primary Sidebar

“md
EXPAND YOUR KNOWLEDGE AND STAY CONNECTED
Get the latest med device regulatory, business and technology news.

DeviceTalks Weekly

See More >

MEDTECH 100 Stock INDEX

Medtech 100 logo
Market Summary > Current Price
The MedTech 100 is a financial index calculated using the BIG100 companies covered in Medical Design and Outsourcing.
MDO ad

Footer

MASSDEVICE MEDICAL NETWORK

DeviceTalks
Drug Delivery Business News
Medical Design & Outsourcing
Medical Tubing + Extrusion
Drug Discovery & Development
Pharmaceutical Processing World
MedTech 100 Index
R&D World
Medical Design Sourcing

DeviceTalks Webinars, Podcasts, & Discussions

Attend our Monthly Webinars
Listen to our Weekly Podcasts
Join our DeviceTalks Tuesdays Discussion

MASSDEVICE

Subscribe to MassDevice E-Newsletter
Advertise with us
About
Contact us

Copyright © 2025 · WTWH Media LLC and its licensors. All rights reserved.
The material on this site may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with the prior written permission of WTWH Media.

Privacy Policy