Mesh Lawsuits Filed: Ten-Thousand and Growing

iStockphoto image

October 17, 2012 ~ Court cases filed around the country naming six mesh makers currently number 10,000 and are growing, some at a rate of 100 new cases filed a week.

MDND has added up the number of lawsuits pending in federal court consolidated in multidistrict litigation (MDL) as well as those cases filed in New Jersey and in Georgia.

There were 200 lawsuits filed against mesh maker, Ethicon (Johnson & Johnson) alone in federal court since September 30.

Here are the numbers of cases consolidated in the Southern District of West Virginia before the Honorable Judge Joseph Goodwin. This is called multidistrict litigation because consistent court rulings allow the cases to move through the courts with more expediency.

Each case can still be tried individually and will be awarded on its individual merit.

So. District of West Virginia as of October 16, 2012:

American Medical Systems, Inc. (MDL No. 2325), 1,887

Boston Scientific Corp. and Ethicon, Inc. (MDL No. 2326), 1,179

Ethicon, Inc. (MDL No. 2327) and 1,854

C.R. Bard, Inc. (MDL No. 2187) and 1,307

Coloplast (MDL No. 2387) 40

In Atlantic City, New Jersey Superior Court before the Honorable Judge Carol Higbee, as of October 16, 2012:

C.R. Bard is facing there have been 312 cases filed against C.R. Bard

Gynecare, a division of Johnson & Johnson has had 1,693 cases filed

In the Middle District of Georgia:

These are cases filed against Mentor concerning its Ob tape. As of October 16, they number 143 cases.

Total for MDL and New Jersey and Georgia= 8,415 lawsuits filed against seven mesh makers for injuries sustained after women were implanted with synthetic mesh and suffered injuries including mesh erosion, perforation of organs, nerve entrapment, pain, disability, and other outcomes.

This number does not include various lawsuits filed by individuals in state courts around the country.

Background

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration outlined the potential for complications in its July 2011 Safety Communication (here) and stated that these complications are “not rare” [their emphasis] and that,

“it is not clear that transvaginal POP repair with mesh is more effective than traditional non-mesh repair in all patients with PO and it may expose patients to greater risk.”

POP is pelvic organ prolapse while SUI is stress urinary incontinence, two conditions which are treated with synthetic mesh made of polypropylene. While the FDA has issued this warning about pelvic organ prolapse mesh, it has not come to the same conclusions about SUI mesh, though it is made of the same material and many of the women who have filed lawsuits have similar complaints or injury and disability.

“The FDA continues to evaluate the effects of using surgical mesh to repair SUI and will communicate these findings at a later date.”

From January 2008 through December 2010, the agency received 2,874 reports of complications associated with surgical mesh devices used to repair POP and SUI with 1,503 reports associated with POP repairs and 1,371 associated with SUI repairs. It is predicted these numbers represent anywhere from 1% to 10% of real-life incidents since the FDA database for adverse events is little known and difficult to navigate.

Mesh patient Deb C. recently asked what’s happened to the SUI conclusions by the FDA?

‍

Learn More:

FDA Safety Notification, July 2011

http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/Safety/AlertsandNotices/ucm262435.htm

NJ Superior Court/ Judge Carol Higbee NJ – Bard

http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/mass-tort/pelvicmesh/bard/bard-case.pdf

NJ Superior Court / Gynecare

http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/mass-tort/pelvicmesh/gynecare/gynecare-case.pdf

Middle District of Georgia

https://ecf.gamd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/AsccaseDisplay.pl?75532

Southern District of West Virginia/ Bard Cases