C.R. Bard and subsidiary Davol are facing mounting litigation involving hernia mesh products that some patients say cause a plethora of complications including chronic pain, adhesions, erosion, and unplanned surgeries. If you were implanted with a Bard or Davol hernia mesh and suffered a severe complication or adverse event, contact us today. You may be entitled to seek justice and compensation through a hernia mesh lawsuit.
Mesh Injury Lawsuits
Table of Contents
Patients across the country are filing lawsuits alleging they suffered serious injuries from Bard and Davol mesh, injuries that they say they should never have experienced. The mesh devices involved in these lawsuits include:
- Composix E/X
- Kugel Patch
According to the lawsuits, plaintiffs who received Bard’s polypropylene mesh devices allege they were seriously injured by mesh failures and were forced to have additional, unplanned surgeries to have the mesh removed from their bodies and internal injuries repaired.
Other plaintiffs list other injuries in their lawsuits, including:
- chronic and debilitating pain
- allergic reactions
- mesh adhesions to internal organs
- unwinding mesh fibers
Lawsuits Centralized in MDL
The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation was tasked with determining if all federally-filed Bard mesh injury lawsuits should be centralized. The Panel issued an order in early August 2018 transferring the litigation to the U.S. District Court of Ohio under District Judge Edmund A. Sargus.
The transfer order included more than 50 lawsuits filed in 21 federal courts and another 70 cases from 27 districts may be included in the transfer as tag-a-longs. The plaintiffs in these cases allege that Bard designed and made defective mesh products that erode, unwind, and fail, causing patients to have to endure additional operations to try to have the mesh removed and to have internal injuries repaired. Earlier in the year, Davol and Bard supported a motion to centralize the lawsuits as long as Composix Kugel Patch lawsuits were included. While some plaintiffs opposed this caveat, the Panel noted that it would address the issue during the transfer review process.
Some patients who received these hernia mesh devices say they suffered serious injuries including adhesions, inflammatory responses, foreign body and allergic reactions, organ and tissue perforations, and erosion of the mesh. These patients were forced to have surgeries to have the mesh removed from their bodies.
One patient said he was implanted with Bard’s Ventralight ST mesh and was forced to have it removed within three years. When his physician went in to remove the mesh, it was protruding through the abdominal wall, and a buildup of fluid in the patient’s abdomen was leaking.
In the injury lawsuit, the plaintiff accuses the manufacturer of making a defective product using adulterated and substandard materials, of using a coating that functions as a breeding ground for the proliferation of bacteria, and of providing defective and inadequate warnings and instructions.
The plaintiffs in the lawsuits against Bard allege that the manufacturer knew or should have known the devices posed a risk to patients and should have warned patients and their healthcare providers about the increased risks of infection, inflammatory, foreign body, and allergic responses, pain, mesh erosion, bowel obstructions, encapsulation, and strangulation of the hernia.
If you or a family member suffered serious adverse events or complications such as the ones listed on this page, contact us now. You may be entitled to significant financial compensation, and we can help.