To our valued clients: Our office remains open and we will continue to work (remotely) for you.

Articles Posted in Transvaginal Mesh

With the two-year statute of limitations ending in a number of US states, plaintiffs of transvaginal mesh lawsuits are rushing to get their cases in on time. Already, manufacturers are facing thousands of lawsuits from victims seeking damages for serious complications sustained. Included among the defendants: Boston Scientific Corp, CR Bard Inc., Johnson & Johnson subsidiary Ethicon Inc., American Medical Systems Inc., Cook Medical Inc., and Coloplast Corp.

Transvaginal mesh injury litigation submitted in federal courts is being consolidated for discovery in the U.S. District Court in the Southern District of West Virginia for multi-district litigation. According to media, in that court, Boston Scientific alone has been hit with over 6,300 related defective medical device complaints, with over half of them filed this year alone.

In Massachusetts, please contact our Boston transvaginal mesh injury lawyers to request your free case evaluation.

According to a new study by Russian scientists, younger women with less serious cases of pelvic organ prolapse and those who had hysterectomies appear to be more at risk of experiencing post-surgical complications after they are implanted with a vaginal mesh device than other patients. The scientists presented their findings at the annual Congress of the European Association of Urology earlier this year.

At Altman & Altman, LLP our Boston vaginal mesh injury lawyers represent women who have suffered serious health complications from an implant device. You may have grounds for a Massachusetts transvaginal mesh lawsuit against one of these manufacturers-Avaulta, Bard, Tyco, Sofradim, Gynecare, American Medical Systems, Boston Scientific, Johnson & Johnson’s Ethicon, Mentor, Uretex, and others. Vaginal mesh devices are also used to treat stress urinary incontinence.

The study group was comprised of 677 patients who underwent vaginal implant mesh procedures between 2006 and 2010 as part of their treatment for POP. One month after their surgeries, the scientists conducted follow up evaluations, and then again three months later. They found that 17% of the participants experienced vaginal mesh complications:

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.

With another Avaulta transvaginal mesh injury trial against C.R. Bard scheduled for trial this month, women and defective medical devices attorneys all over the US will be watching to see what happens. Unfortunately, for what maybe thousands of women, the injuries caused to them by a Bard Avaulta TVM product cannot be undone. Hopefully, however, many of them will be able to also seek redress for the harm they have suffered.

Since at least 2005, the US Food and Drug Administration has received reports of complications linked to this mesh implant device. Already, hundreds of Bard Avaulta TVM cases have been submitted as part of multidistrict litigations.

Bard Avaulta Transvaginal Mesh

In the first transvaginal mesh lawsuit to go to trial, A jury has awarded Christine Scott and her husband $5.5 million CR Bard and her physician. They had sued for damages because of injuries Scott says she sustained after two Avaulta Plus transvaginal mesh devices were implanted in her to treat urinary incontinence.

It wasn’t until she underwent nine revision surgeries and eight other procedures to try to get both devices removed that doctors said the devices could not be safely taken out of her body. Court documents report that the device has cut Scott’s colon and tissue, which continues to grow through the mesh holes. She will likely experience chronic pain for life and her runner lifestyle has been affected.

While the jury awarded $5 million to Scott, her husband was awarded $500,000 because his wife can no longer have sexual intercourse with him. CR Bard was found 60% liable, while Scott’s doctor, Tillakarasi Kannappan, was found 40% liable.

Contact Information