Tag

recall Archives - Carey Danis & Lowe

GM Steering Recall Class Action: Join a Class Action

By | Class Action, Uncategorized

UntitledIn February 2015, General Motors issued a power steering recall that targeted 81,000 vehicles. The electronic power steering system in these vehicles, which included the Chevrolet Malibu, Chevrolet Cobalt, and Pontiac G6, unexpectedly failed, resulting in drivers experiencing great difficulty in steering the vehicles.

The vehicles that were part of the February 2015 recall are:

Chevrolet Malibu

  • all 2004 and 2005 models
  • some 2006, 2008, and 2009

Chevrolet Malibu Maxx

  • all 2004 and 2005 models
  • some 2006 models

Chevrolet HHR

  • some non-turbocharged model vehicles from 2009 and 2010

Chevrolet Cobalt

  • some 2010 models

Saturn Aura

  • some 2008 and 2009 models

Saturn Ion

  • all 2004 – 2007 models

Pontiac G6

  • all 2005 models
  • some 2006, 2008, and 2009 models

According to a New York Times article on the GM power steering recall, the car manufacturer attempted to discreetly address the power steering defect.

GM didn’t make any public announcement about the power steering problem, even though they were aware of the defect. Instead, the car manufacturer notified dealers of how to fix the power steering defect, but only if car owners complained.

It wasn’t until the power steering complaints grew to such a number that GM finally made the decision to issue a power steering recall.

Could you join a class action lawsuit about the GM steering recall?

If you owned or leased one of the recalled vehicles, you may be eligible to participate in a GM lawsuit about power steering. Contact one of our class action attorneys for a free case evaluation. One of our attorneys can guide you through your legal options, and help you decide if filing a class action lawsuit is right for you.

To learn more, please contact Tiffany M. Yiatras, Corey D. Sullivan, or Francis J. “Casey” Flynn, Jr. by calling 800.721.2519. You can also send an email to Tiffany M. Yiatras at tyiatras@careydanis.com.

We look forward to assisting you in any way that we can.

$4 Billion DePuy ASR Hip Settlement in the Works

By | Defective Medical Device litigation, Hip/Knee Replacement, Product Liability, Uncategorized

DePuy ASR Hip Replacement Lawsuit Update: Trials Scheduled to Begin this Year in Maryland, New Jersey, and OhioClaims targeted at DePuy, a unit of Johnson & Johnson, over their ASR hip implant may soon be settled following the announcement of a $4 billion agreement intended to settle approximately 7,500 DePuy ASR hip lawsuits in state and federal courts across the country. According to Bloomberg, plaintiffs have filed lawsuits against DePuy and Johnson & Johnson claiming that their ASR hip implant was defectively designed, compromised health, and required numerous revision surgeries.

It is estimated that each plaintiff will receive a compensation package of around $300,000 for each of their surgical operations, though this could change depending upon a plaintiff’s age and other factors, such as the severity of injuries incurred from the ASR hip implant.

Approximately 12,000 lawsuits are pending in state courts in California, New Jersey, and Illinois. In Toledo, Ohio, DePuy ASR hip lawsuits have been consolidated into a multidistrict litigation (MDL) called In re: DePuy Orthopedics, Inc., ASR Hip Implant Products Liability Litigation, MDL no. 2197, which is being heard in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio.

DePuy ASR Hip Implant History

In 2005, DePuy began selling their ASR hip implant in the U.S. Five years later, in August 2010, the metal-on-metal hip implant was recalled due to its high failure rate. DePuy removed approximately 93,000 hip implants from the market in the U.S. and around the world.

To explain their reason for the recall, DePuy pointed to a UK study whose data revealed a 12 – 13 percent failure rate for the ASR XL Acetabular System and the ASR Hip Resurfacing System, a model sold outside the U.S. that was never approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) due reports that it released excessive amounts of metal particles.

Though the UK study reported an abnormally high failure rate, it appears that Johnson & Johnson and DePuy had gathered their own data that showed an even higher failure rate at 37 percent within 4.6 years. Additionally, the New York Times reported that two years before the DePuy ASR hip recall, a DePuy consultant notified the head of the DePuy orthopedic unit about the ASR hip implant’s defective design.

Thus, there were a number of warning signs alerting DePuy and Johnson & Johnson as to the flawed nature of their ASR metal-on-metal hip implant.

Future of DePuy ASR Hip Lawsuits

Though the current settlement amount is estimated to be around $4 billion, sources say this number could increase as patients continue to develop problems with the defective medical device in the near future, and require revision and replacement surgeries.

As it stands, DePuy’s agreement appears to contain nothing that could potentially hinder patients from trying to obtain a compensation package from DePuy and Johnson & Johnson to cover medical expenses.

This means that, at the current moment, the settlement has no limit.

How Carey Danis & Lowe Can Help You

The defective medical device lawyers at Carey Danis & Lowe are encouraged by the news of the $4 billion DePuy ASR hip settlement. As a law firm that represents victims of the DePuy ASR hip implant, Carey Danis & Lowe hopes that case resolution following this settlement is swift and efficient, as so many people have claimed pain, suffering, and injury from this defective medical device.

If you believe that you have incurred injuries from the DePuy ASR hip implant, contact a defective medical device lawyer at Carey Danis & Lowe to discuss your legal options and for assistance with filing a DePuy ASR hip lawsuit. When contacting our St. Louis based law firm, you can also speak with one of our on-staff nurses about metal-on-metal hip implant safety concerns.

Share your DePuy ASR hip implant story with Carey Danis & Lowe today by calling 800.721.2519, or by submitting a confidential personal injury claim.

Learn more about the DePuy ASR hip and personal injury litigation on the Carey Danis & Lowe blog. Stay current on the latest defective medical device news, such as the recent metal-on-metal hip implants ban in UK hospitals.

Carey Danis & Lowe Investigates Bard LifeStent Cases After FDA Class 1 Recall

By | Defective Medical Device litigation, Uncategorized

Published October 30, 2013 by PR Web

St. Louis, Missouri (PRWEB) October 30, 2013

bard_lifestent_solo_vascular_stent_lawsuit_fda_recallThe defective medical device attorneys at Carey Danis & Lowe are currently investigating Bard LifeStent cases following an October 18, 2013 recall announcement made by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). As a national law firm representing victims of defective medical devices, Carey Danis & Lowe provides legal assistance to individuals who have experienced injuries from faulty medical products that have been recalled by the FDA.

In mid-October, the FDA announced a class 1 recall of the Bard LifeStent Solo Vascular Stent over faulty deployment.* The Bard LifeStent solo vascular stent, a mesh tube implanted into a blood vessel to treat lesions, is known to deploy partially and with difficulty, and in some cases, the stent entirely fails to deploy.

These deployment problems place patient health and safety at risk. According to the FDA, patients with inadequately deployed Bard LifeStent devices have experienced bleeding, limb loss, heart attacks, stroke, and death. Furthermore, patients have often undergone surgical operations to repair and replace the defective stent to avoid future health complications.

Though the FDA has taken action to recall the Bard LifeStent device due to life-threatening adverse events, claims targeted at Bard’s medical device have not yet been heard in a court of law at the time of writing.

The FDA class 1 recall concerns stents manufactured by Bard between November 2011 to June 2012.

Carey Danis & Lowe is currently investigating Bard LifeStent cases, and invites individuals who believe their injuries stem from defective stent deployment to reach out to the law firm for a gratis legal evaluation. For more information about legal services provided by Carey Danis & Lowe, call 800-721-2519.

About Carey Danis & Lowe

Carey Danis & Lowe is a plaintiff’s litigation firm based in St. Louis, Missouri with law offices across the United States in Illinois, Missouri, and Florida. Carey Danis & Lowe specializes in defective drug and pharmaceutical litigation and class action lawsuits. The Carey Danis & Lowe team is comprised of experienced attorneys working alongside knowledgeable and professional staff that includes medical doctors, nurses, and information technology specialists. Contact Carey Danis & Lowe at 800-721-2519 for more information about our legal services.

Source
*U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Bard LifeStent Solo Vascular Stent: Class 1 Recall – Failure to Deploy:http://www.fda.gov/Safety/MedWatch/SafetyInformation/SafetyAlertsforHumanMedicalProducts/ucm371415.htm

USA Today Editorial Decries Johnson & Johnson and DePuy for Failure to Properly Address Defective DePuy ASR Hip Implant

By | Defective Medical Device litigation, Hip/Knee Replacement, Uncategorized

cdl_hip_replacement_lawsuit_settlementsA recent USA Today editorial piece published on March 24 takes the position that Johnson & Johnson and DePuy mismanaged the development and marketing efforts behind their DePuy ASR Hip Replacement system.

Stemming from our own investigation into the DePuy ASR Hip implant, lawyers at Carey Danis & Lowe agree that neither Johnson & Johnson nor their subsidiary, DePuy, correctly addressed any of the warning signs.

According to the USA Today opinion piece, Johnson & Johnson and DePuy ignored red flags, and as a result, did not recall the product in a timely fashion. After years of receiving failure reports and concerns from surgeons, Johnson & Johnson finally initiated a DePuy ASR Hip recall in August 2010.

The DePuy ASR Hip implant is a metal-on-metal artificial hip that causes the release of metal ions into the bloodstream, surrounding tissues, and bone. The metal ions travel through the bloodstream, and have been linked to neurological damage.

An interesting point made by USA Today is that blame for the defective device being sold on the market does not lie solely with Johnson &  Johnson and DePuy. Blame should also be put on Congress, according to USA Today, who apparently passed a loophole permitting quick approval processes.

Though the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) makes significant efforts towards protecting the public, it is important that if warning signs appear during any part of the development, approval, or marketing processes, efforts must be made towards addressing them, even if that means scraping the product entirely.

DePuy ASR Hip implant lawyers at Carey Danis & Lowe are committed to upholding consumer safety, and work hard to hold companies like Johnson & Johnson and DePuy accountable when their business practices do not align with protecting patient health.

Defective medical device lawyers at Carey Danis & Lowe encourage individuals who have been injured by the DePuy ASR Hip to contact one of our lawyers today about filing a DePuy ASR Hip lawsuit by calling 800.721.2519 or by submitting a legal claim form.

FDA Sends Stryker Warning Letter about Negligent Business Practices

By | Defective Medical Device litigation, Hip/Knee Replacement, Uncategorized

Submit Your Claim

FDA Sends Stryker Warning Letter about Negligent Business PracticesAccording to a Reuters report published on March 12, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has sent Stryker a warning letter about its business practices and its marketing strategy. The letter follows a visit by the FDA to a Styrker plant in November 2012.

The FDA visited a Stryker plant in Portage, Michigan to conduct an inspection, and discovered that Stryker, the manufacturer of orthopedic implants, had been marketing implants without FDA approval. Furthermore, Stryker had also recalled one of their products without communicating this action to the FDA.

It appears that Stryker had been marketing the Neptune Waste Management System without having received approval from the FDA.

In June 2012, Stryker issued a voluntary recall of two of their hip implant devices. The recall included the Stryker Rejuvenate and the Stryker ABG II modular-neck hip stems. According to the Stryker website, the medical device manufacturer recalled the hip stems due to reports of corrosion.

The Stryker Rejuvenate and the Stryker ABG II modular-neck hip stems are metal-on-metal hip implants, which have recently come under heightened investigation by the FDA due to an increasing number of adverse event reports.

Patients who have received implants of the Stryker hip stems have experienced adverse local tissue reactions (ALTR) that can result in tissue inflammation and pain in the hip implant area. Caused by the release of metal ions from a metal-on-metal hip implant, ALTR has also been linked to metallosis, bone deterioration, and tissue and muscle death.

To lawyers at Carey Danis & Lowe, the FDA’s inspection of the Stryker Michigan plant is a significant piece of upholding consumer safety. Defective medical device lawyers at Carey Danis & Lowe strongly believe in holding medical device manufactuers accountable for their negligent business practices, especially in cases where they market products that have not been FDA approved.

For more information about recalled Stryker products, contact Carey Danis & Lowe. If you have received a defective and recalled Stryker hip implant, contact a lawyer at Carey Danis & Lowe to discuss your case. Call Carey Danis & Lowe at 800.721.2519 or submit a legal claim form.

Second DePuy ASR Hip Trial Begins in Chicago Court

By | Defective Medical Device litigation, Hip/Knee Replacement, Uncategorized

Second DePuy ASR Hip Trial Begins in Chicago CourtOn the heels of Johnson & Johnson’s loss in a California Superior Court case regarding their DePuy ASR Hip implant, the second DePuy ASR Hip lawsuit started on March 11 in the Circuit Court of Cook County in Chicago, Illinois.

The case is Strum v. DePuy, and involves the plaintiff, Carol Strum, a 54 year old nurse and Illinois resident. After receiving a DePuy ASR Hip implant, Strum claims that her implant proved defective after only three years.

Strum’s case is the second DePuy ASR Hip Replacement lawsuit to go to trial of approximately 10,750 cases, according to a Bloomberg report. The first lawsuit to go to trial, Kransky v. DePuy, was lost by Johnson & Johnson, and resulted in the jury ruling that Johnson & Johnson and DePuy would have to pay $8.3 million in compensatory damages to the plaintiff, Loren Kransky.

Furthermore, the jury decided that Johnson & Johnson and DePuy would not have to pay punitive damages to the plaintiff. The case was heard in a California Superior Court in Los Angeles.

In opening statements delivered on March 11, Johnson & Johnson’s lawyer argued that the DePuy ASR Hip implant is not a defectively designed medical device, and that the recall of the hip device in 2010 was unrelated to any defect.

Conversely, in his opening statements to the jury, Strum’s lawyer provided details about the defective nature of the metal-on-metal design of the DePuy ASR Hip. Strum’s lawyer emphasized how the metal ball and metal cup knocked against one another during movement causing the release of metal ions into surrounding tissue, muscles, bone, and the bloodstream.

In addition to claiming that Strum suffers from metal poisoning, Strum’s lawyer stated that DePuy neglected to sufficiently inform Strum, Strum’s healthcare provider, and her surgeon about the health risks associated with the DePuy ASR Hip implant.

The Johnson & Johnson lawyer stated that the plaintiff’s body rejected the DePuy ASR Hip implant. The cause of Strum’s health complications, according to the defendants, is related to Strum’s biological response to the hip implant, and has nothing to do with her surgeon nor the hip implant itself. As this case moves forward, it will be interesting to see how Johnson & Johnson and DePuy supports this claim.

In Kransky v. DePuy, the plaintiff was seeking punitive damages in the amount of $179 million. In her case, Strum is also seeking punitive damages along with compensatory damages.

Lawyers at Carey Danis & Lowe have been closely watching the Chicago DePuy ASR Hip trial to see if this time around the jury will award punitive damages to the plaintiff to punish Johnson & Johnson and DePuy for their negligence.

To file a DePuy ASR Hip lawsuit and for a free legal evaluation about your DePuy ASR Hip case, contact a defective medical device lawyer at Carey Danis & Lowe by calling 800.721.2519 or by submitting a legal claim form.

DePuy ASR Hip Trial Update: DePuy Marketing Director Voiced Concerns about DePuy ASR Hip Implant and Advised Recall

By | Defective Medical Device litigation, Hip/Knee Replacement, Uncategorized

DePuy ASR Hip Trial Update: DePuy Marketing Director Voiced Concerns about DePuy ASR Hip Implant and Advised RecallThe first of 10,000 DePuy ASR Hip lawsuits is on trial in a California Superior Court in Los Angeles County. The trial, Kransky v. DePuy, continues to move forward with testimony, most recently from a DePuy marketing executive.

he testimony delivered late last week concerned a Johnson & Johnson director of hip marketing, Paul Berman, who wrote an email voicing concerns about the safety of the DePuy ASR Hip Replacement system, and advised a recall. Berman’s email was sent out on March 14, 2010.

According to a Bloomberg News report on the most recent DePuy ASR Hip trial proceedings, a total of four emails were sent out to other Johnson & Johnson and DePuy executives addressing Berman’s misgivings about the DePuy ASR Hip implant. Furthermore, Randall Kilburn, a DePuy marketing executive, testified that he showed Berman’s email to the then DePuy president, David Floyd.

Clearly, then, DePuy executives at all levels were made aware of at least one employee’s concerns regarding the safety of the DePuy ASR Hip implant. However, the DePuy ASR Hip recall took place several months after Berman’s email was sent out in March 2010. It appears that these early warning signs and concerns were ignored for far too long, allowing time for more patients to receive defective hip implants.

The DePuy ASR Hip Replacement system has become synonymous with an abnormally high failure rate. According to information supplied to the jury in Kransky v. DePuy, evidence revealed the failure rate for the DePuy ASR Hip implant to be “35.8 percent within 4.57 years”.

This failure rate calculation comes from an internal DePuy study conducted to determine the efficacy of the DePuy ASR Hip Replacement system.

In a recent New York Times article, it appears that Johnson & Johnson also received a letter from a doctor and consultant addressing the defective design of the DePuy ASR Hip implant that, according to his observations, was causing harm to patients. The letter was sent in 2008, and advised that Johnson & Johnson “slow its marketing” in order to conduct an in-depth study of the DePuy ASR Hip Replacement system.

Evidently, Johnson & Johnson chose to ignore the warning signs and letters coming internally and from outside of the company about the defective nature of the DePuy ASR Hip Replacement system.

If you or someone you love has received a DePuy ASR Hip implant, and has experienced any health complications related to the implant, such as metal poisoning, neurological damage, numerous revision surgeries, and local tissue, muscle, and bone damage, you may be eligible to receive compensation for such undue suffering and loss.

For a free legal consultation and to file a DePuy ASR Hip lawsuit, contact an experienced trial lawyer at Carey Danis & Lowe by calling 800.721.2519 or by submitting a claim using our legal claims form.

First Gynecare Prolift Lawsuit Trial Moves Forward in New Jersey Court: Johnson & Johnson Official Concedes to High Failure Rate of Defective Gynecare Prolift Mesh

By | Defective Medical Device litigation, Transvaginal Mesh, Uncategorized

Kugel & Transvaginal Mesh Patch ComplicationsThe first trial of 1,800 regarding Johnson & Johnson’s defective Gynecare Prolift vaginal mesh was heard in a New Jersey state court in Atlantic City last week. The trial, known as Gross v. Gynecare Inc., concerns a nurse from South Dakota named Linda Gross, who claims that she underwent 18 revision surgeries to first remove the Gynecare Prolift mesh, and then to repair the damages caused by Johnson & Johnson’s notorious surgical mesh product, according to a report published by Bloomberg.

A Johnson & Johnson company official, the first witness to be brought to the stand in the Gross trial, admitted that a subsidiary of the company, Ethicon, who developed and manufactured the Gynecare Prolift mesh, was aware of the product’s high failure rate. In fact, this Johnson & Johnson Ethicon representative, Scott Ciarrocca, confessed that after 6 months about 20% of the Gynecare Prolift mesh devices proved defective, and after a year, the failure rate was documented to be even higher at 27%.

Gross, like the other 1,800 plaintiffs who have filed lawsuits against Johnson & Johnson, have done so because they believe that Johnson & Johnson marketed the defective vaginal mesh in spite of its high failure rate and potential to cause serious health complications, and committed a huge misstep by disregarding these facts in order to sell the device.

In June 2012, Johnson & Johnson announced that it had plans to discontinue sales of four of its vaginal mesh products, and would begin scaling back availability over a four month period. The products that have been recalled include Gynecare Prolift, Prosima Pelvic Floor Repair System, the Prolift+M Gynemesh M, and the Gynecare TVT Secur System.

In explaining its reason for recalling these four vaginal mesh products, a Johnson & Johnson spokesperson refused to refer to the move as a recall, but rather a “discontinuation”, according to a report from Reuters. Furthermore, the Gynecare Prolift mesh recall, according to this same Johnson & Johnson spokesperson, had no relation to the Gynecare Prolift lawsuits nor high failure rates and compromised health. Instead, Johnson & Johnson asserted that plans to stop sales worldwide are concerned with long term market relevance and success rates.

Defective vaginal mesh has caused a significant amount of pain and suffering in patients who received a surgical implant to treat stress urinary incontinence (SUI) or pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Not only have these individuals had to receive numerous revision surgeries, but they also have experienced the following health problems related to defective vaginal mesh, in particular the Gynecare Prolift product:

  • infections
  • vaginal erosion
  • organ perforation
  • severe pain in pelvic region
  • pain during intercourse
  • vaginal discharge and bleeding

If you or a loved one has received a surgical implant of vaginal mesh, such as Johnson & Johnson’s Gynecare Prolift, and have experienced serious and negative side effects like those described above, you and your loved one may be eligible to receive compensation for medical expenses, lost wages, and physical and emotional pain and suffering.

For a free legal consultation, contact an experienced trial lawyer at Carey Danis & Lowe today by calling 800.721.2519.

First Trials for Defective DePuy ASR Hip Replacement System Set for January 2013

By | Defective Medical Device litigation, Hip/Knee Replacement, Uncategorized

First Trials for Defective DePuy ASR Hip Replacement System Set for January 2013A state case regarding the recalled DePuy ASR hip replacement system is scheduled to go to trial in January 2013 in Prince George’s County, Maryland. If DePuy does not settle with plaintiffs before trials begin, the Maryland court will hear three cases regarding health complications related to DePuy’s ASR hip implants.

In August 2012, DePuy, a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson, settled state cases in Nevada regarding defective ASR hip replacement lawsuits. Trials for these ASR hip replacement cases filed against DePuy were scheduled to begin in December 2012, but due to the settlement, trial dates have since been canceled. The individuals in each Nevada case received $200,000 each, according to a Bloomberg News report.

In 2010, due to what they claimed to be poor sales as opposed to the escalating reports of ASR hip replacement failures, Johnson & Johnson’s DePuy initiated a worldwide recall of 93,000 ASR hip replacement systems. Ultimately, DePuy admitted that the recall was the result of the high ASR hip replacement failure rate.

Individuals who have filed lawsuits against DePuy have claimed that DePuy’s defective ASR hip replacement system resulted in numerous painful revision surgeries, severe pain, dislocated joints, joint malfunction and dislocation, infection, bone fractures, and metallosis. Plaintiffs claim that the unique design of the ASR hip replacement, being a metal-on-metal total hip replacement, led to an accumulation of metal flakes inside of the body.

6,000 DePuy ASR hip replacement lawsuits have been consolidated into a Multi-District Litigation based in Toledo, Ohio overseen by U.S. District Judge David A. Katz. There are another 2,000 cases filed against Johnson & Johnson’s DePuy in states across the U.S., including those in Nevada, Maryland, California, Wisconsin, Florida, and Utah.

The MDL No. 2197 based in Ohio is due to convene for a Status Conference in January 2013, during which time the court will most likely detail preparations for the first bellwether trials scheduled to begin in May 2013.

To file a DePuy ASR hip replacement lawsuit, contact an experienced defective medical device lawyer at Carey Danis & Lowe.

UK Health Organizations Conduct Study on Transvaginal Mesh Safety

By | Defective Medical Device litigation, Transvaginal Mesh, Uncategorized

UK Health Organizations Conduct Study on Transvaginal Mesh SafetyIn the United Kingdom, the Department of Health and the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) have been collaborating on a safety review of transvaginal mesh. Their collaborative effort results from an observed need to analyze the safety of these medical devices and to provide UK surgeons, gynecologists, and urologists with the most current and pertinent information regarding transvaginal mesh and transvaginal tape.

One recommendation made by the reviewing body was to create a registry of patients who have received surgical implantation of either transvaginal mesh or transvaginal tape. The UK health officials hope to develop such a registry in order to make the data available to surgeons for review of post-surgery patient health.

In conducting its own analysis of reports and data relating to the safety of transvaginal mesh and transvaginal tape, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration discovered that severe health complications related to the surgical implantation of these vaginal medical devices are not rare. Furthermore, in its scientific literature review, the FDA made the conclusion that there was no significant benefit in using transvaginal mesh versus a non-mesh device in treating patients with pelvic organ prolapse (POP).

Also, the FDA noted that the most commonly reported transvaginal mesh health complication is vaginal mesh erosion.

Transvaginal mesh and transvaginal tape are used to treat women suffering from stress urinary incontinence (SUI) or pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Patients have reported to the MHRA in the UK and the FDA in the U.S. a number of severe health complications resulting from surgical implantation of transvaginal mesh. These serious health complications include vaginal bleeding, vaginal pain, painful intercourse, infection, scarring, transvaginal mesh erosion, and damage to surrounding tissues and organs.

Furthermore, some women must undergo revision or corrective surgeries following the initial implantation of their transvaginal mesh or transvaginal tape.

In the United States, transvaginal mesh and transvaginal tape manufacturers have pulled their defective medical devices off the market. Johnson & Johnson has removed four of its transvaginal mesh and transvaginal tape products from the market following increased reports of severe health complications related to these products. The Johnson & Johnson vaginal mesh recall included the Gynecare TVT Secur system, the Gynecare Prosima, the Gynecare Prolift and the Gynecare Prolift+M.

If you or a loved one has suffered from a transvaginal mesh or transvaginal tape implant, do not suffer in silence, and learn more about filing a defective surgical mesh claim. To file a transvaginal mesh lawsuit, contact an experienced defective medical device lawyer at Carey Danis & Lowe.