Bard Ventralex Hernia Mesh Complications Led To Need For Additional Surgeries: Lawsuit
A product liability lawsuit filed against Davol, Inc. and C.R. Bard indicates that complications with its Ventralex hernia mesh caused a Florida woman to suffer serious internal injuries, leading to the need for additional surgeries to correct the problems.
The complaint (PDF) was filed by Latoya Dawson-Webb in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida on October 13, alleging that Bard Ventralex mesh carries an unreasonable risk of danger and injury.
Dawson-Webb underwent a hernia repair surgery in July 2015, during which doctors implanted a Ventralex Hernia Mesh Patch. However, just days after her surgery she began to suffer nausea, vomiting, and an ability to make a bowel movement.
Doctors determined that a technical failure of the Ventralex mesh was causing the complications, resulting in a large ventral hernia that contained multiple loops of her bowel.
“Dawson-Webb also was informed the Ventralex Hernia Mesh Patch did not take and she would be required to undergo another surgery. Dawson-Webb subsequently consulted with other surgeons, who confirmed Dawson-Webb needed to undergo: (a) a second hernia surgery to reverse the complications; and (b) plastic surgery to correct the damage to her abdomen,” the lawsuit states. “Dawson-Webb has likely suffered further adverse effects that have not been able to be diagnosed at present, but she will likely require significant treatment in the future, including additional surgeries to remove the Ventralex Hernia Mesh Patch and treat future complications.”
Hernia Mesh Lawsuits
Dawson-Webb’s complaint is the latest in a growing number of lawsuits filed in recent months by individuals nationwide who have experienced hernia mesh complications, alleging that there are design defects associated with several different widely used surgical repair products used in recent years.
In addition to a small number of other Bard Ventralex hernia lawsuits, most of the cases filed have involved the Atrium C-Qur patch or Ethicon Physiomesh, which was recalled last year.
Pronounced “Secure”, Atrium C-Qur mesh was approved by the FDA on March 2006, for use in hernia repair, chest wall reconstruction and to repair traumatic or surgical wounds. The patch is made of a polypropylene mesh, with an outer coating of gel made from 3 fatty acids, which plaintiffs allege caused severe infections, allergic reactions and other complications after Atrium C-Qur hernia repair.
The Ethicon Physiomesh patch was recalled from the market in May 2016, amid a high number of complications, after the manufacturer failed to identify the cause of the problems. While the action taken in the United States was classified as a “market withdrawal”, Johnson & Johnson’s Ethicon subsidiary has indicated that it has no intentions of returning the product to the market and asked hospitals to return the product.
As a growing number of Atrium C-Qur lawsuits and Ethicon Physiomesh lawsuits continue to be filed throughout the federal court system, it is expected that small groups of cases will eventually be prepared for early trial dates, which are designed to help the parties gauge how juries are likely to respond to certain evidence and testimony that may be repeated throughout the litigation, and potentially help facilitate hernia mesh settlements with the manufacturers.