Mesh Medical Device News Desk: What’s NewSep 18th, 2012 | By Jane Akre | Category: Welcome
We’ve been a little more than a year since we first established this website and from the traffic, comments and phone calls it appears the number of mesh-injured folks keeps rising. There isn’t a day that goes by when I don’t hear from someone who is desperate for answers because they are in pain their doctors deny it may be mesh-related.
It may not be, but there appears to still exist a system-wide rejection of mesh-related injuries within the medical community.
Doctors and their medical societies seem to remain ignorant about mesh complications even though it was in July 2011 that the FDA put out its strongest worded warning that the benefits of mesh may not be worth the side effects. Even the conservative FDA admits that mesh can erode, breakup in the body, travel and pierce other organs, cause nerve damage, chronic pain, even immunological disorders as the body fights to rid itself of the invader. The human body is very smart.
In an effort to get the word out, I recently created a Reporter’s Guide to Covering Mesh Issues, Mesh 101, which hits all the highlights I believe. (here) Let me know what’s missing.
Hernia mesh continues to be a problem for some. The FDA has not come out with a similar warning for mesh used for hernia repair even though it is the same polypropylene material Could it be the properties of a petroleum-based product put into the body that are causing the problems? These people have nowhere to go legally.
Search on the site for “mesh is not inert” which was an early warning from Dr. Donald Ostergard.
In terms of litigation, Christine Scott, in a California state court, recently won a $5.5 million judgment against C.R. Bard for the incontinence mesh she had placed. See her story here. Her husband won $500,000 of that judgment because of a ruined sex life.
She has set up www.meshgonewrong.com. Story here.
Scott said upon winning her case that the worst part was not being able to speak out to warn others as synthetic mesh implants continue for hernia, incontinence and prolapse! Shows where her priorities are. I’ve asked for an interview but when lawyers are involved, sometimes that is difficult. That’s okay, I’m patient.
I also have an interview request into Deborah and Michael Smith. She had her mesh case dismissed but her lawyer has a petition filed for a rehearing. Once that is resolved I hope to ask her about her case which is interesting because her mesh was implanted abdominally. The FDA warning only covers transvaginal placement of mesh, that is, through the vagina. It also does not cover hernia mesh.
This is another hurdle still ahead for those mesh-injured patients.
Stay tuned! More to come.