Drug Injury Lawyers Blog
A federal judge says that a plaintiff’s defective design, manufacturing design, failure to warn, negligence, marketing defect, and strict product liability claims in one pelvic mesh case against Boston Scientific Corp can proceed. The manufacturer had sought to have a number of the defective medical device allegations thrown out.
In her transvaginal mesh device case, the plaintiff contends that she suffered serious complications because the Vesica kit vaginal sling she was implanted with in 1998 was defective. She had used the device to treat her stress urinary incontinence. However, by 2008, she started to experience a number of recurring symptoms. Her doctor told her then that she didn’t need additional treatment.
It wasn’t until after the woman began to experience greater incontinence, lower abdominal pain, and bleeding in 2011 that her doctors notified her that the mesh device was extruding. She underwent revision surgery and later filed her vaginal sling injury lawsuit.
Among the plaintiff’s contentions are that Boston Scientific made and distributed a product that had erosive traits, resulting in the mesh device’s failure that then allegedly caused her health complications. Her vaginal sling lawsuit notes that before undergoing the original implant procedure in 1998, the medical device manufacturer had already started preparing for a safer, newer, mesh product than the one she was given.
Vaginal Sling Injuries
Vaginal mesh slings have been linked to injuries and serious health complications in thousands of women. Among the side effects reported:
• Infection • Urinary problems • Mesh erosion • Vaginal pain • Pelvic pain • Organ injury • Problems and pain during sex • Mesh hardening • Vaginal scarring • Fistulas • Prolapsed organs • Itching • Vaginal migration • Vaginal wall erosion • Vaginal scarring
In addition to revision surgery, which can involve not just removing the defective mesh product, but also replacing it and repairing any damage done, a woman adversely affected by a medical implant device also might have to undergo blood transfusions, IV therapy, drainage procedures, as well as risk additional health complications and take time off work and her other responsibilities to recover.
The US Food and Drug Administration has even warned about serious complications related to surgical mesh devices. After putting out a notice in 2008 that there were serious complications linked to surgical mesh inserted transvaginally to treat SUI and POP, in 2011, the federal agency issued an update noting that serious complications related to surgical mesh to treat POP are not rare. The FDA has even ordered the manufacturers of vaginal mesh implants to conduct internal studies of the injuries associated with their products.
You want to work with an experienced vaginal sling injury lawyer that knows how to pursue your compensation from a negligent manufacturer, physician, and/or others.
Ohio Judge Upholds Negligence Claim in Transvaginal Mesh Lawsuit Against Boston Scientific, Public Health Watchdog, April 12, 2013
FDA Safety Communication: UPDATE on Serious Complications Associated with Transvaginal Placement of Surgical Mesh for Pelvic Organ Prolapse, FDA, July 13, 2011
More Blog Posts:
Woman Awarded $3.35 million in Vaginal Mesh Case against Johnson & Johnson, Boston Injury Lawyer Blog, April 11, 2013
Bard Avaulta Transvaginal Mesh Lawsuit to Go to Trial in New Jersey, Drug Injury Lawyers Blog, February 20, 2013
Woman Files Vaginal Mesh Lawsuit Against Boston Scientific For Her Pain and Permanent Injuries, Boston Injury Lawyer Blog, July 11, 2012
