Transvaginal Mesh Device Lawsuit Update: Nearly 23,000 Lawsuits Pending in Federal Court
The first federal transvaginal mesh (TVM) trial resumed on July 29, 2013 for the Multidistrict Litigation (MDL ) in the Southern District of West Virginia before The Honorable Judge Joseph R. Goodwin. This first bellwether trial involves plaintiff Donna Cisson, who claims that a Bard Avaulta Plus device degraded her body, causing her pain and other physical ailments and requiring her to undergo several revision surgeries. The Honorable Judge Joseph R. Goodwin declared the first federal transvaginal mesh case a mistrial on July 10, 2013, after a gynecology expert witness for plaintiff testified about Bard’s marketing practices in violation of the judge’s previous ruling on the topic.
As of now, over 23,000 transvaginal mesh lawsuits are currently pending in the federal courts. Thousands of women have experienced complications from these transvaginal mesh devices, such as device erosion, organ perforation, intense pain, inability to have sexual intercourse and infection. Many of these women have been required to undergo multiple revision surgeries. According to the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML), there are six multidistrict litigations involving different transvaginal mesh device manufacturers where approximately 23,000 lawsuits are currently pending:
- MDL 2187 – In re: C.R. Bard, Inc., Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation: 3,399
- MDL 2325 – In re: American Medical Systems, Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation: 7,227
- MDL 2326 – In re: Boston Scientific Corp. Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation: 4,622
- MDL 2327 – In re: Ethicon, Inc., Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation: 7,117
- MDL 2387 – In re: Coloplast Corp. Pelvic Support Systems Products Liability Litigation: 437
- MDL 2440 – In re: Cook Medical, Inc., Pelvic Repair System Products Liability Litigation: 25
A study conducted by Namma Marcus-Brown and Peter von Theobald and published in the International Urogynecology Journal, has provided statistics on the many possible complications related to the use of transvaginal mesh devices. The article, entitled “Mesh Removal Following Transvaginal Mesh Placement: A Case Series of 104 Operations,” provides detailed reports on the removal of transvaginal mesh devices and the postoperative treatment required to repair damages caused by such mesh devices in over 100 patients. In particular, the article provides that “[e]ighty-three patients underwent 104 operations including 61 complete mesh removal, 14 partial excision, 15 section of sub-urethral sling, and five laparoscopies. Main indications were erosion, infection, granuloma, incomplete voiding, and pain. Fifty-eight removals occurred more than 2 years after the primary mesh placement. Mean operation time was 21 min, and there were two intraoperative and ten minor postoperative complications. Stress urinary incontinence (SUI) recurred in 38% and cystocele in 19% of patients.” (emphasis added) This article demonstrates the serious injuries suffered by women as a result of transvaginal mesh devices.
Another study has given cause to further controversy involving the efficacy of transvaginal mesh kits. This study entitled “Mesh Kits for Anterior Vaginal Prolapse Are Not Cost Effective,” was conducted by Sunshine Murray, et. al. and focused on the observable economic faults of using transvaginal mesh in patients. The article, published in the International Urogynecology Journal, concluded that “[m]esh kits for AVP(Anterior vaginal prolapse) repair are not cost effective, regardless of the OR (operating room) time saved.” (emphasis added) Overall, this article demonstrates that while other methods for anterior vaginal prolapse have been seen as safe and effective, the cost of using these types of methods involving mesh kits are significantly more expensive for the patient.
If you or a loved one has experienced serious injuries as a result of a transvaginal mesh device, contact the experienced pharmaceutical attorneys at Schlichter, Bogard & Denton, LLP toll-free at 1-800-873-5297. We will confidentially evaluate your case for free and without any obligation.
Legal Disclaimer: The choice of a lawyer is an important decision and should not be based solely on advertisements.