Disclaimer - By publishing this information on this Web site, the Boston, Massachusetts law firm of Altman & Altman LLP is not claiming to represent any clients or cases mentioned here. The content provided is designed to inform readers and is not intended as legal advice.

Surgeries for hernia repairs are extremely common in the United States. In fact, about 500,000 surgical repairs are performed annually. Unfortunately, the hernia mesh devices used in many repairs are linked to multiple serious injuries, including organ perforation and bowel obstruction. If you have been harmed due to a mesh implant, the information below will help you determine whether to seek the counsel of a Boston hernia mesh injury lawyer.

Hernia mesh works by covering or “plugging” the areas of weakened muscle in the abdomen. There are several different types of hernia mesh, including those made from synthetic materials and those made from biologic materials. Synthetic mesh is typically made of polypropylene, composite mesh, or polyester fibers whereas biologic mesh is derived from animal or even human tissue.

Complications Related to Hernia Mesh Products

Although most injuries are linked to synthetic hernia mesh, any type of mesh can cause medical complications. The most common problems arising from mesh implants include:

  • Inflammation
  • Infection
  • Hernia recurrence
  • Adhesion to body tissues
  • Encapsulation of mesh
  • Folding of mesh following placement
  • Mesh erosion
  • Adhesion to the bowel or other organs
  • Bowel perforation
  • Revision surgery
  • Chronic pain

If you are experiencing inflammation or pain following the placement of a hernia mesh product, seek medical attention immediately.

What Types of Hernia Mesh Products are Linked to the Most Injuries?

Just about every type of hernia mesh on the market has some risk of failure or injury, but the following types and brands account for most lawsuits.

  • Ethicon Physiomesh: The FDA approved physiomesh without clinical trials because it was “similar” to other kinds of mesh already on the market. Johnson & Johnson voluntarily withdrew physiomesh products from the market in 2016 due to the high risk of hernia recurrence and the potential need for revision surgery. Lawsuits allege that the unique coating on physiomesh products is not bio-compatible and can result in serious medical complications.
  • Kugel Hernia Patch: Following its recall in 2005, C.R. Bard has been at the center of thousands of lawsuits claiming that kugel patches endangered the lives of patients. From bowel obstruction to organ perforations, the kugel patch has been linked to more serious complications than any other hernia mesh product. If you have been injured by a kugel hernia patch, it is in your best interest to seek the counsel of an experienced MA hernia mesh injury lawyer as soon as possible. You may be entitled to compensation for your injuries.
  • Atrium C-Qur Mesh: Although it hasn’t been officially recalled, many surgeons have stopped using c-qur mesh because of the high risk of infections, allergic reactions, and bowel obstructions. In addition, lawsuits allege that this type of mesh is extremely difficult to remove once it becomes attached to the bowel.

Altman & Altman, LLP – Hernia Mesh Injury Lawyers

If you have been injured by any type of defective or dangerous medical product, the skilled injury team at Altman & Altman, LLP can help. You may be entitled to compensation for medical expenses, pain and suffering, and lost wages. At Altman & Altman, LLP, we have been protecting the rights of injury victims for more than 50 years. Our knowledgeable attorneys will analyze the details of your case and position you for the best possible outcome. We have an impressive track record of obtaining compensation for clients, and we will work tirelessly to protect your rights. When medical device manufacturers and pharmaceutical companies put profits before the health and safety of patients, they should be held accountable for their actions. If you’ve been injured, we can help. Contact Altman & Altman, LLP today for a free and confidential consultation about your case.

In the past decade, hernia mesh products have faced increased scrutiny about the harm that they may cause to patients who are fitted with them. Hernia mesh products are intended to support weakened muscle to help a hernia heal, and prevent it from re-erupting. Studies have shown that hernia mesh products do indeed lessen the likelihood of reoccurrence of hernias.

However, studies have also started to reveal that hernia mesh products can cause serious, and in some cases life-threatening, complications to patients that are fitted with them. The most serious of which include nerve damage, fistulas (an abnormal connecting together of organs that are meant to remain separated), bowel blockages and negative autoimmune reactions when the body rejects the mesh.

Ethicon is a subsidiary company underneath the umbrella of pharmaceutical conglomerate Johnson & Johnson. The company has manufactured surgical sutures and wound closure devices since 1887. They are responsible for about 80 percent of the total United States market share of surgical sutures and are present in 52 countries worldwide.

Ethicon also produces surgical mesh products that are used after surgical procedures to fix hernias – which are an eruption of muscle tissue or organs through an area of weakened muscle or connective tissue, most often caused by excessive pressure built up in the area. The mesh is designed, in theory, to help support the weakened muscle and prevent the hernia from reoccurring.

Familiar problems

In 2016, Ethicon “voluntarily” pulled one of their hernia mesh products, Physiomesh, from the market after just a short time of production. The mesh was approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) under the FDA 510(k) approval program, which enabled Ethicon to skip pre-market research and safety studies. Ethicon argued that Physiomesh was similar enough to its predecessor product, Proceed, to not require the same scrutiny.

Unfortunately, serious reports started to pour in that Physiomesh was resulting in similar problems that plagued Ethicon’s other mesh-based surgical products – such as their transvaginal mesh products, which are currently facing thousands of lawsuits nationwide.

The Physiomesh product was constructed with polypropylene, a chemical that has components which can be incredibly dangerous is exposed to human tissue. It will essentially “stick” to the inside of a patient’s body, which can cause serious damage if it sticks to an area such as the intestines.

To try and prevent contact, the device is covered in a coating of multiple materials. But judging from their decision to pull the product from the market, it seemingly does not work with enough consistency. Even worse, the Physiomesh product uses less of the structural polypropylene, making them more fragile, and resulting in patients experiencing the mesh breaking apart while still inside of them.

Call us to look over your case today

If you or somebody you love has been negatively affected or harmed by a faulty surgical mesh product, then call our office today. A legal professional will look over your case personally and offer the best course of action moving forward to secure the financial compensation that you deserve and need to continue living your life.

Companies like Ethicon believe that if 90 percent of people benefit from a faulty, dangerous device, that the other 10 percent of people they cause to suffer don’t deserve justice. At Altman & Altman LLP, we believe in fighting this dangerous mentality and have held negligent companies selling faulty medical products accountable for over 40 years.

The end goal of medical science and pharmaceutical companies should be to create life-saving medical advances that help people without subjecting them to unnecessary risks. By continuing to manufacture products that they knew could cause life-threatening side effects to patients, even after going down that same road and being taken to court thousands of times, it is a sign that the company needs a serious wakeup call.

According to a recently-released report by the news organization ProPublica, manufacturers of the anticoagulant (blood thinner) Xarelto made more physician payments than any other drug company in 2015. Physician payments were made for promotional speaking, travel, gifts, and meals. But not for research. Past studies have shown that when physicians receive payments from a drug manufacturer, they tend to prescribe more of that manufacturer’s drugs than those who do not. Considering the high risk of serious, potentially life-threatening side effects linked to Xarelto, this is certainly cause for concern.

Each year, ProPublica gathers information about payments made by pharmaceutical companies to physicians for promos, travel, royalties, etc. Across the board, pharmaceutical and medical device companies made approximately $2 billion in physician payments in 2014 and 2015, with Xarelto payments taking the cake in 2015. ProPublica’s study is not the only one to find that these payments result in higher prescriptions of related drugs. Researchers at Harvard Medical School had similar findings in 2016. In a study of medical industry payments to physicians in Massachusetts, they found that for every $1,000 a physician received, his or her rate of prescribing the associated drug increased by 0.1 percent. If you have been injured by a dangerous or defective pharmaceutical, contact a Boston drug injury lawyer today.

Xarelto Linked to Excessive Bleeding

There are currently more than 11,000 Xarelto lawsuits pending in the U.S. It goes without saying that plaintiffs in these cases will likely use the findings from the ProPublica report to support their claims that Xarelto’s manufacturers, Johnson and Johnson and AG Bayer, failed to warn physicians and patients about the risks associated with the drug. Marketed as a low-maintenance alternative to warfarin, Xarelto quickly rose in popularity. Due to high demand, Xarelto’s manufacturers may have rushed the product to market without adequate safety testing. Although all anticoagulants come with an increased risk of excessive bleeding (hemorrhaging), warfarin has an antidote to that bleeding, known as a reversal agent. To date, Xarelto has no such reversal agent. Excessive bleeding has resulted in thousands of injuries and some deaths. If you have been harmed by a defective prescription drug, contact a MA drug injury lawyer today.

Symptoms of Internal Bleeding

If you are currently undergoing Xarelto treatment, talk to your doctor about the risks of excessive bleeding. As internal bleeding may not be immediately apparent, it is important to look for possible signs. If the bleeding is rapid and severe, blood may collect under the skin, forming a bulge or discolored spot. Severe bleeding may result in shock or loss of consciousness. If you develop any of the symptoms below, seek immediate medical attention:

  • Uncontrollable bleeding
  • Dark urine
  • Dark stool
  • Unexplained bruises
  • Blood clots
  • Cough that produces blood
  • Blood in vomit
  • Unexplained pain
  • Joint pain
  • Headaches
  • Dizziness
  • Weakness
  • Fatigue

Lawsuits allege that Xarelto manufacturers failed to warn physicians about the risk of uncontrollable bleeding, that the drug was defectively designed, and that warning labels were not updated in a timely manner. Johnson & Johnson and Bayer AG are also under fire for not recalling Xarelto when the risks became apparent. Continue reading

Lawsuits claiming that talc-based products have caused ovarian cancer in women who use them have been on the rise in recent years. According to research, women who use talcum powder for personal hygiene have a significantly higher risk of developing ovarian cancer than those who do not. Despite this risk, however, talcum powder products are still on the market. Even more disturbing is new evidence that manufacturers of talc-based products, such as Johnson & Johnson, may have known about the risk for decades.

The United States vs. Europe

In Europe, talc is banned from personal care products. In the United States, however, manufacturers are permitted to add minimal amounts of ingredients to personal care products with limited safety testing. In some cases, no safety testing is required at all. The difference between the US approach and that of the EU is night and day. Laws in the EU state that “chemicals linked to cancer and birth defects simply don’t belong in cosmetics.” To more clearly illustrate the difference, consider this: The EU has banned more than 1,300 potentially toxic chemicals from personal care products while the US has only banned 11. If you have been harmed by a dangerous product, contact a Boston injury lawyer today.

The Link Between Talcum Powder and Ovarian Cancer

In 2013, the journal Cancer Prevention Research published a study on the risk of talcum powder use. The Brigham and Women’s Hospital study reviewed data from nearly 2,000 women. Their results showed an increased risk of developing ovarian cancer of up to 30 percent for women who used talc-based products for personal hygiene. According to research, when used for personal hygiene, talc minerals can travel through the fallopian tubes to the ovaries. If the particles become lodged in the ovaries, they can irritate the tissue, resulting in inflammation which can, in turn, become tumorous.

Large Awards in Wrongful Death and Product Liability Lawsuits

After using Johnson & Johnson baby powder for 35 years, Jacqueline Fox was diagnosed with ovarian cancer. Last year, the pharmaceutical giant was ordered to pay $72 million for the wrongful death of the victim. Although Fox passed away a few months before the trial began, she expressed her desire to warn other women of the dangers of talcum powder. Another victim, Gloria Ristesund, was awarded $55 million last year for her talcum powder liability claim. Ristesund claimed that she used baby powder and Shower to Shower for more than three decades before being diagnosed with ovarian cancer in 2011. If you have been injured by a defective product, contact a MA injury lawyer today.

Despite all of the above, the FDA claims there is insufficient evidence to support the link between talc and ovarian cancer. As such, the agency refuses to label talc-based products as carcinogens even though they agreed that talc has a similar behavior pattern as asbestos. Continue reading

Hernia mesh is a surgical product used to repair hernias. The screen-like material goes under or over the weakness, or it can act as a plug. Unfortunately, surgical mesh has been linked to serious, life-threatening complications. The most common risks associated with hernia mesh implantation are perforation, infection, and adhesion. Many of these devices contain polypropylene, a type of plastic commonly used in medical products. However, according to the Polypropylene Material Data Safety Sheet, permanent implantation is listed under “prohibited uses.” As hernia mesh is intended to be a permanent product, this statement has raised many questions.

FDA Warning

Last year, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) released on article on the dangers of hernia mesh implants.

Many complications related to hernia repair with surgical mesh that have been reported to the FDA have been associated with recalled mesh products that are no longer on the market. Pain, infection, recurrence, adhesion, obstruction, and perforation are the most common complications associated with recalled mesh. In the FDA’s analysis of medical adverse event reports to the FDA, recalled mesh products were the main cause of bowel perforation and obstruction complications.”

Shortly after the above article was released, several hernia mesh products were pulled from the shelves or subjected to an official recall. Although all hernia mesh implants come with some degree of risk, certain types are associated with more injuries than others. Currently, there are more than 50 different surgical mesh products on the market. The materials used to make these products range from plastics to pig skins. If you are considering getting a hernia mesh implant, discuss the risks with your doctor before making a decision on which product is best for your unique needs. If you have been injured by any type of medical device, contact a MA defective medical products lawyer today.

Alternatives to Surgical Mesh

Depending on the type and severity of your hernia, safer alternatives to hernia mesh may exist. These include:

  • Bassini repair: A suture inguinal hernia repair
  • Desarda repair: A suture only repair
  • McVay repair: A procedure in which abdominal tendons are sutured to the inguinal ligament
  • Shouldice repair: A two-layer suture only repair that utilizes the patient’s tendon and fascia

If you are considering having a hernia repair surgery, ask your doctor if any of the above alternatives are right for you. If you have been injured by a medical device, contact a Boston injury lawyer today.

In some cases, hernia mesh should be avoided entirely. If, for example, your hernia is so small that it can be repaired with sutures, hernia mesh should not be used. Unfortunately, doctors sometimes go straight to the mesh because sutures are rarely a permanent fix. But the problem is – when a suture fails, the doctor can easily stitch it back up, whereas when the mesh fails, serious complications are common.

Risks Associated with Hernia Mesh

Although all hernia mesh comes with risks, the type of mesh and placement within the body have a significant role to play in the risks you may, or may not be, facing. For example, coated hernia mesh is more likely to cause infections than the non-coated type. Below are complications associated with various types of hernia mesh:

  • Infection
  • Adhesion of the mesh to the bowel
  • Bowel obstruction
  • Severe abdominal pain
  • Rashes
  • Pain in the legs, groin, and testicles
  • Sexual discomfort or pain
  • Diarrhea
  • Constipation
  • Nausea

Altman & Altman, LLP – Boston’s Premier Personal Injury Law Firm

If you have been injured by any type of medical product, the skilled legal team at Altman & Altman, LLP can help. Our knowledgeable, experienced attorneys will ensure that you understand your rights and options before moving forward. If you have been injured due to another’s negligence, you may be entitled to compensation for medical bills, pain and suffering, and lost wages. Don’t go through this alone. Contact Altman & Altman, LLP today for a free and confidential consultation about your case.

Thousands of lawsuits have been filed against manufacturers of metal-on-metal hip implants, alleging that claimants suffered painful, debilitating complications from the devices. DePuy’s ASR and Pinnacle models are the focus of most lawsuits, with DePuy’s costs estimated at around $4 billion and growing. The cases involving the two models were recently consolidated into separate multidistrict litigation (MDL) cases. Thousands more remain in pending status. If you experienced severe pain or medical complications after receiving a metal-on-metal hip implant, contact a Boston injury lawyer today.

Complications Associated with Metal Hip Implants

Hip replacement surgery is one of the greatest medical innovations in decades. Millions of people have been able to improve their quality of life as a result. Unfortunately, as with all medical procedures and devices, hip implants come with risks. But some of these risks may be the result of defective design and failure to warn physicians and patients of associated complications. Risks include:

  • Blood clots
  • Metallosis
  • Infection
  • Bone fracture
  • Death

Metallosis

One of the main concerns with metal-on-metal hip implants is the debris that may be released into the body when metal components rub against one another. When this occurs, a condition called metallosis can result. This dangerous condition is caused by a buildup of metal debris in the body’s soft tissue. The effects of metallosis can be quite dangerous, resulting in death of the surrounding tissue and potential blood poisoning. If cobalt, titanium, or chromium ions are released into the bloodstream, toxicity, inflammation, and even cancer can result. Metallosis can also cause:

  • Failure of the implant
  • Joint pain
  • Tissue death
  • Bone deterioration
  • Blood poisoning
  • Toxicity
  • Formation of pseudotumors or cysts
  • The need for revision surgery.

Nearly 35 percent of retrieved hip implants have notable corrosion and other types of damage. Bone fractures, joint dislocations, improperly positioned components, infection, defective stem designs, and poor cementing techniques may contribute to the loosening of stem components and the need for a revision surgery. Unfortunately, revision surgery is a difficult, painful, and longer process than the initial hip replacement. Thigh and / or knee pain are usually the first indicators of a complication with a hip replacement. If you are experiencing any complications after receiving a hip replacement, contact your health care provider immediately.

DePuy Settlements Top $4 Billion

Plaintiffs in both MDL cases and pending cases allege that the medical devices had design defects and that DePuy knew about the risks but failed to adequately warn physicians and patients. In 2013, DePuy and its parent company Johnson & Johnson, agreed to a settlement in cases involving people injured by the manufacturer’s ASR models. At that time, the company set aside approximately $4 billion to settle the claims. Last year, the manufacturer agreed to an additional settlement of $420 million. If a defective or dangerous medical device has caused you harm, contact a MA defective medical device law firm today. Continue reading

On the surface, a power morcellator is an intriguing and seemingly fantastic showcase of modern medical technology. The drill-like device is able to perform laparoscopic surgeries, such as hysterectomies and myomectomies, without being overly invasive, requiring a less than two centimeter incision, and reduces the patient’s recovery time and post-operative pain drastically.

A morcellator works by cutting large chunks of tissue, such as a uterus, into smaller chunks and then using suction to vacuum the flesh out of the body via its long tubular attachment. A majority of the devices were manufactured and distributed under the Johnson & Johnson umbrella through their subsidiary company, Ethicon.

Power morcellators may cause cancer

Unfortunately, these devices have been revealed to carry serious risks. Chiefly among them is the risk that they can actually cause the spread of benign and cancerous cells in men and women that can directly cause them to develop into various cancers, such as metastatic leiomyosarcoma (a uterine cancer) in women. The use of morcellators may have actually been the catalysts in some patients that resulted in their cancers.

Morcellators are especially dangerous if used in women undergoing hysterectomies. About 40 percent of hysterectomy cases occur because of uterine fibroids, which are non-cancerous tumors that cause an enlarged uterus. These fibroids may be hiding undetected cancerous cells, which are then broken apart and spread throughout the body by the morcellator, which can cause the cells to grow into malignant tumors throughout the body.

The FDA issued a safety alert in 2014 discouraging the use of power morcellators, and Johnson & Johnson pulled the devices from the market the same year. However, this reactionary response did not help the hundreds of people who claim to have developed cancer or serious complications as a result of the use of power morcellators.

Johnson & Johnson trying to settle, more lawsuits likely

Plaintiffs against Johnson & Johnson and Ethicon argue that the companies knew about the potential risks of the devices but did not warn patients about them. Johnson & Johnson is currently seeking to settle dozens of cases involving people who have developed uterine cancers, and some of the plaintiffs have actually passed away from these cancers during the litigation process.

As awareness of the risks of power morcellators spread, more lawsuits seem likely, as any patient who underwent a procedure with a power morcellator may be entitled to financial compensation on the grounds of the company’s failure to warn about the risks of the product and the use of a defective product that led to their immediate pain and suffering.

If you or someone you love has developed any type of cancer after undergoing a procedure in which a power morcellator was used, you may have a good case to receive financial compensation, even if this procedure happened some time ago. The only way to know for sure is to call us for a free consultation to assess the individual details of your situation.

At Altman & Altman LLP, we have over 40 years of experience fighting on behalf of people who were seriously harmed or effected through forces outside of their control. A faulty medical procedure that may result in cancer in otherwise unhealthy people is simply unacceptable, and we will use whatever methods necessary to advocate for you.

Cancer has incredibly serious ramifications that are hard enough to go through without having to worry at the same time about finances. Let us fight to get you the money you need, and deserve.

Call us for a free consultation today at 617-492-3000 or toll-free at 800-481-6199. We are available 24/7.

 

The popular heartburn medication Nexium, released by pharmaceutical giant AstraZeneca in 2001, has been used by millions around the globe to treat their chronic heartburn with relatively few side effects. Minor side effects include dry mouth, headaches and minor abdominal pain, which are certainly manageable.

However, more severe side effects have come to light in thousands of patients, side effects undisclosed by AstraZeneca and not mentioned on Nexium’s list of side effect, and hundreds of these patients have filed lawsuits seeking financial compensation for their pain and suffering as a result.

Serious side effects include…

It has been revealed that Nexium can lead to severe kidney complications and even accelerated dementia in its patients. Lawsuits stemming from kidney damage have been filed against AstraZeneca as far back as 2004, and yet they have continued to release the product without mentioning the potential risk of kidney damage. On Nexium’s own website, there is no mention of these well-established risks.

Three studies from 2015 and 2016 showed evidence that patients who were currently taking Nexium were twice as likely to sustain an acute kidney injury, that patients had a 20 to 50 percent higher chance of developing chronic kidney disease, and that patients taking Nexium had a 44 percent higher risk of developing dementia.

Clearly, the risks are not insignificant. These side effects are not only dangerous to a person’s overall health and wellbeing, they can be incredibly costly as well.

Kidney disease sufferers may need to undergo dialysis, transplants or grafts, and will likely maintain consistent hospital visits throughout the rest of their lives to keep an eye on their condition. Kidney failure accounts for about $42.5 billion annually in private and Medicare costs according to the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.

Sufferers of dementia can lose their independence, their job, and more, as they may need to be moved into an expensive assisted living facility. Dementia can be extremely painful for both the individual and their families to go through, not to mention the fact that the average assisted living care facility can cost upwards of $70,000 or more per year.

History of legal action

Hundreds of patients who have been negatively affected by Nexium have sought financial recompense as a result of their pain and suffering, both individually and as a group through class action lawsuits. AstraZeneca has been sued over the past decade for negligence, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, and product defects.

Three of these class actions suits were settled in 2015. One ended with a $24 million settlement, another ended with a $20 million settlement, and the last one settled for $7.9 million. More lawsuits are cropping up in recent years with yet another allegation – that Nexium causes bone density loss leading to an increased risk of bone fractures.

If you suffered because of Nexium, call us

If you or somebody you love has been negatively impacted as a result of taking Nexium, call a legal professional from Altman & Altman LLP today. We have over 40 years of experience litigating a wide range of negligence, misrepresentation and faulty drug product cases and will give you the individualized attention necessary to get you the financial compensation you need and are entitled to.

When pharmaceutical giants like AstraZeneca don’t do their proper work to ensure the lasting safety of their customers, we hold them accountable. It is unacceptable to ignore these well-documented risks any longer. If you developed any of these side effects unknowingly due to taking Nexium, call us for a free consultation today at 617-492-3000 or toll-free at 800-481-6199. We are available 24/7.

Lipitor has the distinction of being the best-selling prescription medication of all time. Manufactured by pharmaceutical titan company, Pfizer, Lipitor is prescribed to help treat high cholesterol and reduce the risk of heart attacks and strokes. There is no doubt that Lipitor has helped millions of people since it was approved by the FDA in 1996.

However, recent studies have linked Lipitor to an increased risk of developing another serious disease: type 2 diabetes. In 2012, the FDA released a warning that cholesterol-reducing statin drugs, such as Lipitor, could elevate blood sugar levels in those who take it and lead to diabetes. Pfizer was ordered to add this warning on the Lipitor label.

This warning did not help people who had already developed diabetes while taking Lipitor, and it has led to lawsuits regarding inadequate warnings and a decreased quality of life as a result of this failure to warn consumers about all the potential risks.

About Lipitor

Lipitor is a prescription medication known as a “statin” drug, which means it works with the body to help stop the liver from producing too much “bad” cholesterol, which can lead to heart disease and blood clots (which can lead to strokes).

Lipitor was first approved by the FDA in 1996, and by 2012 had made over $130 billion in sales. Doctors continue to prescribe Lipitor and other statin medications today because of their proven track record of helping reduce the risk of heart disease and strokes.

However, there are other risks associated with statin medication, including muscle damage, memory loss and the aforementioned risk of developing diabetes. Doctors are less inclined to direct a patient to stop taking statin medication because of the former two symptoms (since heart disease and strokes are much more serious afflictions), but developing diabetes is obviously problematic also, so good awareness and consistent checkups and blood sugar testing should be standard when taking these medications.

If you developed diabetes while on Lipitor

You may have a good case for financial recompense if you developed type 2 diabetes while taking Lipitor prior to 2012. Whether or not it was known to Pfizer prior to the FDA demanding they place a warning on their bottles of Lipitor, it is still unacceptable that it took so long to find this link between Lipitor and another very serious disease.

Diabetes has life-altering effects on those who are diagnosed, including costly medical appointments, possible dialysis and surgeries, not to mention a complete change in lifestyle in order to constantly monitor their blood sugar levels. Further risks of diabetes include blindness, neuropathy and deadly kidney disease.

Hundreds of lawsuits regarding Lipitor and diabetes have been filed across the country, and the legal professionals at Altman & Altman LLP have the expertise to figure out the appropriate course of action if you or a loved one was diagnosed with diabetes as a result of taking Lipitor or other statin medications.

There are grounds for lawsuits based on negligence, failing to monitor the safety of a prescription medication, misleading consumers of the risks of a medication, inadequately labeling a prescription medication and ignoring potential risks of a prescription medication. Continue reading

The popular heartburn medication Nexium, released by pharmaceutical giant AstraZeneca in 2001, has been used by millions around the globe to treat their chronic heartburn with relatively few side effects. Minor side effects include dry mouth, headaches and minor abdominal pain, which are certainly manageable.

However, more severe side effects have come to light in thousands of patients, side effects undisclosed by AstraZeneca and not mentioned on Nexium’s list of side effect, and hundreds of these patients have filed lawsuits seeking financial compensation for their pain and suffering as a result.

Serious side effects include…

It has been revealed that Nexium can lead to severe kidney complications and even accelerated dementia in its patients. Lawsuits stemming from kidney damage have been filed against AstraZeneca as far back as 2004, and yet they have continued to release the product without mentioning the potential risk of kidney damage. On Nexium’s own website, there is no mention of these well-established risks.

Three studies from 2015 and 2016 showed evidence that patients who were currently taking Nexium were twice as likely to sustain an acute kidney injury, that patients had a 20 to 50 percent higher chance of developing chronic kidney disease, and that patients taking Nexium had a 44 percent higher risk of developing dementia.

Clearly, the risks are not insignificant. These side effects are not only dangerous to a person’s overall health and wellbeing, they can be incredibly costly as well.

Kidney disease sufferers may need to undergo dialysis, transplants or grafts, and will likely maintain consistent hospital visits throughout the rest of their lives to keep an eye on their condition. Kidney failure accounts for about $42.5 billion annually in private and Medicare costs according to the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.

Sufferers of dementia can lose their independence, their job, and more, as they may need to be moved into an expensive assisted living facility. Dementia can be extremely painful for both the individual and their families to go through, not to mention the fact that the average assisted living care facility can cost upwards of $70,000 or more per year.

History of legal action

Hundreds of patients who have been negatively affected by Nexium have sought financial recompense as a result of their pain and suffering, both individually and as a group through class action lawsuits. AstraZeneca has been sued over the past decade for negligence, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, and product defects.

Three of these class actions suits were settled in 2015. One ended with a $24 million settlement, another ended with a $20 million settlement, and the last one settled for $7.9 million. More lawsuits are cropping up in recent years with yet another allegation – that Nexium causes bone density loss leading to an increased risk of bone fractures. Continue reading

Contact Information