As of Jan. 15, nearly 70,000 transvaginal mesh lawsuits filed against seven different TVM manufacturers were centralized at U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia for pretrial management. Ten months ago, more than 43,000 such cases had been centralized. These are just the federal cases!
Meanwhile, the transvaginal mesh attorneys at Reich & Binstock continue to represent and to give free consultations to women who believe implantation of the transvaginal mesh caused their serious injuries.
“The injuries, conditions, and complications suffered by numerous women around the world who have been implanted with the Pelvic Mesh Products include, but are not limited to, erosion, mesh contraction, infection, fistula, inflammation, scar tissue, organ perforation, dyspareunia, blood loss, neuropathic and other acute and chronic nerve damage and pain, pudendal nerve damage, pelvic floor damage, and chronic pelvic pain,” according to a transvaginal mesh lawsuit that numerous plaintiffs jointly filed in 2012 at the federal Northern District of Texas against Johnson & Johnson and one of its subsidiaries.
The aforementioned lawsuit generally characterized the oft-agonizing medical treatment that TVM victims had to endure as follows: “In many cases, including in the case of the female Plaintiffs identified herein, the women have been forced to undergo extensive medical treatment, including, but not limited to, operations to locate and remove mesh, operations to attempt to repair pelvic organs, tissue, and nerve damage, the use of pain control and other medications, injections into various areas of the pelvis, spine, and the vagina, and operations to remove portions of the female genitalia.”
Corrective surgery is often necessary. In fact, according to a literature review that the medical journal Current Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynecology published in October 2014, the number of revision surgeries has soared in recent years.
The authors, who were affiliated with Georgetown University Hospital in Washington, concluded: “Although the use of TVM has plateaued in recent years, we are seeing an exponential rise in synthetic mesh implant removal. Reconstructive pelvic surgeons advising patients with TVM complications should report that surgical intervention is often necessary, improvement rates of pain-related symptoms after surgery are high, and up to a third may require multiple interventions.”
The following corporations are defendants in the centralized federal cases:
- C.R. Bard
- American Medical Systems
- Boston Scientific
- Cook Medical
The transvaginal mesh is designed to correct pelvic organ prolapse, or POP, which is the bulge of organs into the vagina, and to address stress urinary incontinence, abbreviated SUI, which is the unintended leakage of urine. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved the first SUI mesh in 1996, and it signed off on the first POP mesh in 2002.
Some years later, women who received the synthetic transvaginal mesh began to report serious complications, many of which got the attention of the FDA. In 2011, even the FDA had to issue a safety advisory which, in part, explained that “serious complications associated with surgical mesh for transvaginal repair of POP are not rare.”
A woman who has received the transvaginal mesh and who has experienced complications may be entitled to compensation to cover medical expenses and other losses. For a free consultation from an experienced transvaginal mesh attorney, contact Reich & Binstock, which operates in all 50 states, either by calling the toll-free number below or by submitting an electronic message through the form located on this web page.