Transvaginal Mesh Lawyer Alleges Fraudulent Misrepresentation

A transvaginal mesh lawsuit was filed against American Medical Systems Inc. in the Superior Court of Los Angeles on June 6, 2013. The complaint stated that the “Caldera Desara Sling System” and “Xenform Mesh” caused the plaintiff to suffer organ perforation and painful intercourse. As a result of the allegedly defective medical device, the plaintiff underwent transvaginal mesh revision surgery and continues to suffer from irreversible damage.

Plaintiff claims “permanent injury”

The plaintiff had the device implanted on May 16, 2008 at the POH Regional Medical Center in Pontiac, Michigan. The product was intended to treat the patient’s stress urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse. However, the lawsuit states that, as a result of the defective device, she has suffered “significant mental and physical pain and suffering, has sustained permanent injury, will likely undergo further corrective surgery, autoimmune disorders, has suffered financial or economic loss, including but not limited to, obligations for medical services and expenses, and has endured impaired physical relations.”

Vaginal mesh attorney makes allegations

The plaintiff’s transvaginal mesh lawyer contends that the manufacturers are guilty of “wrongful conduct, acts, omissions and fraudulent misrepresentations.”

The suit contends that American Medical Systems failed to disclose the risks involved and knowingly released dangerous products into the marketplace. Reported injuries and complications included: mesh erosion, blood loss, neuropathy, infection, inflammation, scar tissue, painful intercourse, blood loss, chronic pelvic pain, nerve damage, fecal incontinence, organ prolapse, and other issues.

Women were forced to undergo surgeries to remove parts of their genitalia, receive injections in the spine, and take prescriptions of medications that they would need to be on indefinitely.

Specific causes of action for the transvaginal mesh lawsuit include:

• Strict products liability – failure to warn
• Strict products liability – design defect
• Negligence
• Breach of implied warranty
• Breach of express warranty
• Deceit by concealment
• Negligent misrepresentation
• Intentional misrepresentation

Damages sought

The plaintiff, through her transvaginal mesh lawyer, is seeking compensation for past and future damages, past and future economic loss, loss of earnings and impaired earning capacity, past and future medical expenses, past and future mental distress, punitive damages, attorney’s fees, interest, and any other relief the judge deems necessary and proper.

Surgical mesh litigation background

According to the lawsuit, there has been a litany of complaints over vaginal mesh implants for nearly a decade. The most common complaints were hardening of the mesh, erosion, extrusion, chronic pain and painful intercourse. Studies showed the rate of erosion to be 13 percent, with painful intercourse rates as high as 63 percent. Analysis of the first 100 transvaginal mesh procedures revealed a failure rate of  17 percent.

In 2004, the World Health Organization called the vaginal mesh failure rates “unacceptable.” On October 20, 2008, the FDA issued a public health notification describing over 1,000 adverse events related to pelvic mesh repair systems.

To date, more than 4,000 women have secured the services of a qualified transvaginal mesh lawyer to file complaints against manufacturers of vaginal mesh systems. Defendants in these cases include Ethicon (Johnson & Johnson), Boston Scientific, Coloplast, and more.