Tag

SUI Archives - Carey Danis & Lowe

Transvaginal Mesh Side Effects Can Last A Lifetime

By | Defective Medical Device litigation, Transvaginal Mesh, Uncategorized

Boston Scientific Ordered to Release Defective Transvaginal Mesh DocumentsBoston Scientific Ordered to Release Defective Transvaginal Mesh DocumentsThough medical devices are developed to improve lives, such is not always the case when discussing transvaginal mesh products. Used to treat stress urinary incontinence (SUI) and pelvic organ prolapse (POP), women who have received an implant of a transvaginal mesh product often have not been fully informed of all known health risks associated with mesh.

In an interview for The Globe and Mail, a Canadian news publication, a clinical professor in the urology department at the University of British Columbia was quoted as saying that, due to transvaginal mesh being designed as a permanent implant, removal of the product is challenging, as it is often already fused with surrounding tissues.

Thus, for women who have suffered injuries from transvaginal mesh products, complete removal of the product may not be possible. As a result, severe pain becomes a constant for these women.

The article in The Globe and Mail also describes how the Canadian equivalent of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, Health Canada, has done little to educate women, as well as healthcare providers, about the health risks posed by transvaginal mesh products.

When making important health decisions, the article states, it is of the utmost importance for women to be able to weigh all of the known risks with the benefits.

Carey Danis & Lowe Represents Mesh Users

A personal injury law firm with headquarters in St. Louis, Carey Danis & Lowe represents women across the U.S. who have been injured by transvaginal mesh products. When you seek legal assistance from Carey Danis & Lowe, you can rest assured that our lawyers work tirelessly to recover losses for you.

If you or someone you love has been injured by transvaginal mesh, we invite you to share your case with us during a free, no-obligation case evaluation.

Contact Carey Danis & Lowe by phone at 800.721.2519, or by completing a confidential personal injury claim form.

 

Report Examines Defective Transvaginal Mesh

By | Defective Medical Device litigation, Transvaginal Mesh, Uncategorized

transvaginal_mesh_lawsuit_settlements_mdl_multidistrict_litigation_class_action_lawsuit_vaginal_mesh_fda_lawsuitsThe Corporate Action Network published a report in August 2014 examining transvaginal mesh products, a mesh manufacturer, and the women affected by defective medical products. The report provides a brief overview of transvaginal mesh side effects, including erosion, infection, pain, urinary tract complications, and the return of symptoms of stress urinary incontinence (SUI) or pelvic organ prolapse (POP), symptoms the transvaginal mesh implant was intended to eliminate.

The report also reveals that Johnson & Johnson, the parent company of mesh manufacturer Ethicon, was aware of the defective nature of their transvaginal mesh products, but neglected to warn patients and health care providers about known health risks.

One of the risks that the mesh manufacturer was aware of is nerve injury.

One woman quoted in the report, Terri White of Georgia, claims to have suffered from transvaginal mesh side effects for nine years now. In the report, she states that her life has been changed forever by urinary tract infections, pain, and emotional suffering.

Another woman quoted in the Corporate Action Network report, Kristine Monje of California, states that mesh has taken her life away.

From these two accounts, and the thousands of transvaginal mesh lawsuits pending in courts across the U.S., it is clear that transvaginal mesh has had a negative impact in the lives of so many women.

Carey Danis & Lowe Provides the Legal Support You Need

Carey Danis & Lowe is a defective medical device law firm with headquarters in St. Louis. Our team of dedicated attorneys represents women in transvaginal mesh lawsuits across the country. Hearing our clients’ devastating mesh stories motivates our attorneys every day in working towards manufacturer accountability and victim compensation.

If you or someone you love has been injured by transvaginal mesh, we encourage you to seek justice. Our attorneys are currently investigating transvaginal mesh cases, and invite you to explore your legal options during a free initial case evaluation.

Carey Danis & Lowe is here to listen to your transvaginal mesh story. Contact our law firm today by calling 800.721.2519, or by submitting one of our confidential personal injury claim forms.

 

Vaginal Mesh Injuries Chronicled by Minneapolis Newspaper

By | Defective Medical Device litigation, Transvaginal Mesh, Uncategorized

transvaginal_mesh_mdl_2013_settlements_side_effects_court_filing_lawsuitsA report published in May 2014 by the Minneapolis newspaper, Star Tribune, highlighted the risks of using transvaginal mesh to treat pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and stress urinary incontinence (SUI). A urogynecologist interviewed for the story noted that treating POP with transvaginal mesh has been known to negatively impact a patient’s overall health and well being.

In certain cases, the post-surgery experience has presented a much more difficult reality than living with untreated POP or SUI. Patients who have been severely injured by transvaginal mesh point to mesh erosion as the primary cause for their physical and emotional suffering.

Because there appears to be significant risks involved with using transvaginal mesh, the urogynecologist, Dr. Elizabeth Frank of Park Nicollet Women’s Center, does not use this surgical device to treat POP or SUI. Instead, Dr. Frank opts for other methods that have proven to be safer for patients.

Carey Danis & Lowe Can Help You

As a national law firm specializing in defective medical device litigation, Carey Danis & Lowe has the legal expertise to assist you with your transvaginal mesh case, and can determine if you will be eligible for compensation. If you have been injured by transvaginal mesh, contact a defective medical device lawyer at Carey Danis & Lowe for a free case evaluation.

Share your transvaginal mesh story with a lawyer at Carey Danis & Lowe today. Contact us by phone at 800.721.2519, or by submitting a personal injury claim form.

Iowa Newspaper Reports on Transvaginal Mesh Side Effects

By | Defective Medical Device litigation, Transvaginal Mesh, Uncategorized

transvaginal_mesh_mdl_2013_settlements_side_effects_court_filing_lawsuitsOne woman’s transvaginal mesh story has become the subject of an article published in The Gazette, a newspaper based in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. Frances Shulte, who was interviewed by the Iowa publication, underwent surgery to receive an implant of transvaginal mesh in 2005 to treat stress urinary incontinence (SUI).

Her personal experience involving an incredible amount of pain and suffering is similar to that of thousands of other women who also received an implant of transvaginal mesh.

According to The Gazette, Shulte’s transvaginal mesh eroded, which is an all too common defect of certain types of mesh products. When transvaginal mesh begins to erode inside of the body, it can cause damage to internal organs and severe pain during any kind of movement.

In an effort to raise awareness of life-altering side effects, such as transvaginal mesh erosion, and to prevent future implants of defective mesh, Shulte has filed a lawsuit against the manufacturer of the product that she used.

A West Virginia federal court is currently managing seven transvaginal mesh multidistrict litigations (MDLs). Thousands of lawsuits have been consolidated into this West Virginia federal court targeted at Johnson & Johnson and Ethicon, C.R. Bard, American Medical Systems, Cook Medical, Boston Scientific, Coloplast, and Neomedic, the latter being the latest medical device manufacturer to be added to the transvaginal mesh MDL roster.

As a national law firm providing legal representation to victims of defective medical devices, Carey Danis & Lowe is familiar with Shulte’s transvaginal mesh story. Our team of transvaginal mesh lawyers encourages you to begin exploring your legal options and compensation eligibility today.

If, like Shulte, you would like to ensure that women are no longer injured by defective transvaginal mesh, Carey Danis & Lowe is available now to listen to your own transvaginal mesh story, and to guide you through the process of filing a transvaginal mesh lawsuit against your mesh manufacturer.

Ethicon Transvaginal Mesh Lawsuit News: Judge Rules in Favor of Efficient Deposition Process

By | Defective Medical Device litigation, Transvaginal Mesh, Uncategorized

ethicon johson johnsonIn the Ethicon transvaginal mesh multidistrict litigation (MDL) in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia deposition scheduling process is the topic of one of the most recent pretrial orders filed this month in the case. According to the defendants, Ethicon, Inc., a Johnson & Johnson subsidiary responsible for the development of the Gynecare Prolift transvaginal mesh product, the deposition process must be more efficient.

The defendants argued in pretrial order 55 that the plaintiffs are ordering the deposition of some individuals twice. As such, the defendants claimed that the lengthy deposition process will significantly impact their their business proceedings.

They requested that individuals who have were asked to provide testimony as both a corporate representative and as a fact witness be scheduled in back-to-back meetings, as the current schedule calls for some of these individuals for provide depositions days or weeks apart. As a result, Ethicon asked for a protective order.

As detailed in the pretrial order, the plaintiffs pointed to a deposition process agreement, which states that back-to-back scheduling of witnesses is not necessary. Furthermore, the plaintiffs made an argument against back-to-back scheduling of corporate executives who are also being deposed as fact witnesses due to the importance of evaluating their testimony from one deposition before moving on to the next. Also, plaintiffs made a case against back-to-back depositions, as they saw this as influencing the possibility of the court combining two different depositions from the same individual into a singular testimony.

Ultimately, U.S. Magistrate Judge Cheryl A. Eifert ruled against the defendants’ protective order request on the grounds that the defendants did not adequately demonstrate the need for such an order.

The plaintiffs in the Ethicon MDL have filed their transvaginal mesh injury claims citing that Johnson & Johnson and Ethicon’s transvaginal mesh products caused serious injury, and that the medical device manufacturer failed to warn patients and health care providers about the health risks associated with the use of their surgical mesh products. There are currently 8,553 transvaginal mesh lawsuits in the Ethicon MDL in West Virginia.

Women who have received an implant of transvaginal mesh to treat either pelvic organ prolapse (POP) or stress urinary incontinence (SUI) cite the following as transvaginal mesh injuries: mesh erosion, mesh contraction, organ damage, infection, bleeding, severe pelvic area pain, and painful intercourse. In order to remove the defective transvaginal mesh, individuals have often undergone numerous surgical operations, sometimes with little success.

Carey Danis & Lowe transvaginal mesh lawyers are pleased to see the court rule in favor of collecting depositions in an efficient manner. As a transvaginal mesh law firm representing individuals who claim to have been injured by transvaginal mesh products, Carey Danis & Lowe strongly believes in an efficient legal process that supplies plaintiffs with their day in court.

If you or someone you love has been injured by Johnson & Johnson and Ethicon’s Gynecare Prolift, or another transvaginal mesh product, contact a transvaginal mesh lawyer at Carey Danis & Lowe. Call 800.721.2519 or submit a personal injury claim form.

Two Years Since FDA Transvaginal Mesh Safety Communication

By | Defective Medical Device litigation, Transvaginal Mesh, Uncategorized

fda_transvaginal_mesh_lawsuit_erosion_complications_pain_suffering_injury_vaginal_mesh_implant_medical_device_litigation_attorneys_lawsuitsJuly 13, 2013 marks two years since the release of the transvaginal mesh safety communication issued by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regarding transvaginal mesh products used to treat pelvic organ prolapse (POP). The safety communication has since been updated, most recently in June 2013, with new information as the FDA’s investigation into the safety of transvaginal mesh products continues.

The safety communication is intended to inform health care providers and patients about the risks of transvaginal mesh implantation, and follows a notification issued by the FDA in October 2008 about transvaginal mesh used to treat POP and stress urinary incontinence (SUI).

In the 2008 notice, the FDA communicated that the health complications reported with the use of transvaginal mesh were rare, and in the most recent safety communication from 2011, the FDA corrected that previous conclusion by stating that transvaginal mesh complications are “not rare”.

According to the FDA’s safety communication issued on July 13, 2011, most commonly reported complications with transvaginal mesh products include transvaginal mesh erosion and organ damage. In addition, patients reported to the FDA instances of pelvic area pain, bleeding, pain during intercourse, and urinary complications.

In its review of transvaginal mesh in patients with POP, the FDA concluded that treating POP with transvaginal mesh shows no significantly better patient outcome versus other treatment options.

The FDA continues to collect and review information about transvaginal mesh used to treat POP and SUI. As a national law firm representing individuals who claim to have been injured by transvaginal mesh products, Carey Danis & Lowe transvaginal mesh lawyers await the release of any new information from the FDA regarding these important women’s health issues.

Carey Danis & Lowe is currently accepting transvaginal mesh cases. In addition to a free legal evaluations of transvaginal mesh cases, Carey Danis & Lowe transvaginal mesh lawyers can assist in filing transvaginal mesh lawsuits.

Contact Carey Danis & Lowe today by calling 800.721.2519 or by submitting a personal injury claim form.

Update on Ethicon MDL in U.S. District Court: Over 3000 Plaintiffs Vaginal Mesh Lawsuits Consolidated into MDL

By | Defective Medical Device litigation, Transvaginal Mesh, Uncategorized

Update on Ethicon MDL in U.S. District Court: Over 3000 Plaintiffs Vaginal Mesh Lawsuits Consolidated into MDL Approximately 3397 cases have been consolidated into the Ethicon multi-district litigation (MDL) being heard in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia. The Ethicon MDL is being presided over by U.S. District Judge Joseph R. Goodwin.

In the last pre-trial court order issued by Judge Goodwin, a minor update was given pertaining to the format of the Plaintiff Profile Form, which are documents that release a plaintiff’s medical records for examination.

The next Status Conference in the Ethicon MDL will be held on March 21, 2013.

The Ethicon MDL is being heard in the same U.S. District Court as four other MDLs pertaining to vaginal mesh manufacturers. Each of these vaginal mesh MDLs are being presided over by Judge Joseph R. Goodwin. The four other vaginal mesh MDLs include cases brought against C.R. Bard, Inc., American Medical Systems, Inc., Boston Scientific Corp., and Coloplast Corp.

Though many decisions made in one vaginal mesh MDL sometimes impact the other vaginal mesh MDLs being heard by Judge Goodwin, the most recent pre-trial order delivered in the Ethicon MDL pertains only to this specific MDL.

Ethicon, Inc. is an arm of Johnson & Johnson, which developed and manufactured the Gynecare Prolift vaginal mesh. Plaintiffs in the Ethicon MDL received a implant of the Gynecare Prolift in order to correct conditions known as stress urinary incontinence (SUI) or pelvic organ prolapse (POP). The Gynecare Prolift vaginal mesh has been connected to serious health complications, including infections, vaginal erosion, organ perforation, pelvic region pain, painful intercourse, and vaginal discharge and bleeding.

Johnson & Johnson announced in June 2012 that it would pull four of its vaginal mesh products from the worldwide market. These four vaginal mesh products include the Gynecare Prolift as well as the Prosima Pelvic Floor Repair System, the Prolift+M Gynemesh M, and the Gynecare TVT Secur System.

When discussing its reasons for pulling its surgical mesh off the market, a Johnson & Johnson spokesperson speaking with Reuters stated that Johnson & Johnson was discontinuing sales as opposed to recalling the vaginal mesh products. No reference was made by Johnson & Johnson to the health complications, especially vaginal erosion, linked with use of their vaginal mesh products.

Lawyers at Carey Danis & Lowe have been examining Gynecare Prolift cases as the Ethicon MDL in West Virginia continues to grow larger and move farther into pre-trial proceedings. During this examination process, our lawyers have been offering free evaluations of Gynecare Prolift cases.

If you or someone you love has been injured after receiving an implant of Ethicon’s Gynecare Prolift vaginal mesh, contact a lawyer at Carey Danis & Lowe at 800.721.2519 for more information about filing a Gynecare Prolift vaginal mesh lawsuit.

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.

Plaintiffs in Mentor ObTape MDL No. 2004 Claim Serious Injury from Defective Vaginal Sling

By | Defective Medical Device litigation, Transvaginal Mesh, Uncategorized

Mesh-Vaginal-Slings-300x256Mentor’s ObTape is a surgically implanted medical device used to treat patients suffering from stress urinary continence (SUI). In individuals with SUI, pelvic region muscles have weakened, and begin to put uncomfortable pressure on the bladder. Surgically implanted medical devices, such as Mentor’s ObTape vaginal sling, are meant to act as supporting structures along the vaginal wall.

Though vaginal slings have long been used to treat SUI, Mentor’s ObTape vaginal sling proved to be defective. The result was serious pain and suffering for many patients who received a surgical implant of the vaginal sling.

Common side effects seen with Mentor’s ObTape vaginal sling include vaginal erosion, vaginal extrusion, pelvic region pain, infections, painful intercourse, vaginal discharge, and a number of other health complications.

Mentor’s ObTape vaginal sling was introduced onto the market in 2003, and shortly thereafter was removed in 2006 after mounting reports of patient complications.

Mentor ObTape lawsuits have been consolidated into a Multidisctrict Litigation (MDL) no. 2004, in Re Mentor Corp. ObTape Transobturator Sling Products Liablity Litigation in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia Columbus Division. The Mentor ObTape MDL is being overseen by U.S. District Judge Clay D. Land.

At question in the ObTape MDL is whether Mentor created a poorly designed and manufactured vaginal sling, and in doing so, if they then neglected and failed to warn the public about the safety issues of using the ObTape vaginal sling.

The plaintiffs in the ObTape MDL claim significant injury from the surgical implantation of Mentor’s ObTape vaginal sling, and thus have made claims as to a defectively designed and manufactured device as well as negligence on the manufacturer’s part to effectively warn the public about the safety of the vaginal sling.

If you or a loved one has received a surgical implant of the Mentor ObTape transobturator vaginal sling device, and as a result, you or your loved one has suffered tremendously from complications related to the vaginal sling, compensation for such extreme pain and suffering is due.

For a free legal consultation about your ObTape case and to learn about filing an ObTape lawsuit, contact an experienced defective medical device lawyer at Carey Danis & Lowe by calling 800.721.2519.

Update on Defective Transvaginal Mesh MDLs in U.S. District Court in West Virginia

By | Defective Medical Device litigation, Transvaginal Mesh, Uncategorized

Update on Defective Transvaginal Mesh MDLs in U.S. District Court in West VirginiaLawsuits involving transvaginal mesh and other surgical implants used to treat stress urinary incontinence (SUI) or pelvic organ prolapse (POP) have been consolidated into five individual Multi-District Litigation (MDL) cases in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, overseen by Chief Judge  Joseph R. Goodwin.

The MDLs involve lawsuits that have been filed against C.R. Bard, Inc., American Medical Systems, Inc., Boston Scientific Corporation, Ethicon Inc., and Coloplast Corp.

Parties were convened for a Status Conference Hearing on December 6, 2012, with the next Status Conference for these five MDLs is scheduled for January 10, 2013.

During the Status Conference on December 6, there was discussion about the content of the first of the bellwether trials.

The legal representatives for the defendants made a statement that the first case to go on trial should be one pertaining to stress urinary incontinence (SUI), as lawsuits regarding SUI and surgical implants of transvaginal mesh make up a large majority of cases in the MDLs.

Providing further insight on this topic of SUI cases and POP cases, Chief Judge Goodwin recognized the difficulty of bellwether trials that involve several manufacturers and several products in a single case. Chief Judge Goodwin made a statement indicating his dislike for these cases, and how in choosing cases for the bellwether trials, he will refrain from selecting those that are multi-manufacturer and multi-product.

The defendants and the plaintiffs legal counsel will begin developing discovery pools and trial pools, and during this process, they will be carefully examining each case to determine if it is representative of a majority of the cases consolidated into each of the five MDLs. It was brought up by the plaintiffs’ legal counsel that finding cases that are single product cases pertaining to only SUI or only POP will be difficult, as most cases filed with the court are a combination.

Before the court adjourned, Chief Judge Goodwin acknowledged the great number of lawsuits going to trial in 2013 regarding defective transvaginal mesh products. Chief Judge Goodwin recognized the importance of following these trials.

The first bellwether trial is set for December 3, 2013, and Chief Judge Goodwin has ordered that two trials be prepared for December 3, so that the bellwether process is efficient.

Patients who have received a surgical implant of defective transvaginal mesh, vaginal slings, and vaginal tape to treat SUI or POP have experienced an enormous amount of pain and suffering, including:

  • infection
  • severe pain in the pelvic region
  • bleeding
  • pain during intercourse
  • vaginal erosion
  • organ perforation
  • revision surgery

If you or a loved one has received a surgical implant of defective transvaginal mesh, a defective vaginal sling, or defective vaginal tape, you and your loved one may be entitled to receive recompense for your medical expenses, emotional suffering, and other hardships.

For a free legal consultation about your vaginal mesh case, contact a lawyer at Carey Danis & Lowe to learn more about how to file a vaginal mesh lawsuit. Get legal help today by calling a lawyer at Carey Danis & Lowe at 800.721.2519.