A Pennsylvania man recently filed a lawsuit regarding emotional distress, significant pain and suffering, permanent injuries, and diminished quality of life that he claims occurred as a result of a defective hernia mesh product.
The Ethicon hernia mesh lawsuit seeks recovery of all damages for which plaintiff Joseph W. may be entitled. The defendant is named as Johnson and Johnson, who began selling the Ethicon hernia mesh product in 2010, primarily for the purposes of hernia repair.
Numerous academic studies and medical reports have discovered that despite the defendant’s claims that the mesh material is strong, it is actually prone to degrading inside the patient’s body and affecting surrounding tissues. Furthermore, many patients have reported developing adverse reactions to the mesh.
The mesh product outlined in the Ethicon hernia mesh lawsuit was intended and utilized for permanent implantation into the human body, but may require revision surgery for those patients suffering severe injuries..
According to the Ethicon hernia mesh lawsuit, the defendants failed to warn regulatory agencies, consumers or physicians about the life-threatening risks associated with the degradation of polypropylene.
Polypropylene, according to the lawsuit, has been associated with an inflammatory response, and potential adhesion inside the body, making it difficult for doctors to remove the hernia mesh if necessary.
Some studies named in the Ethicon hernia mesh lawsuit point out that approximately 20 percent of Physiomesh participants had to go through revision surgeries within six months of implantation as a result of hernia recurrences.
In many of those cases, the patients experience their intestines becoming adhered directly to the Physiomesh, making these re-operation procedures more difficult. Studies also show that patients report experiencing pain several months after the product was implanted.
In May of 2016, Ethicon issued a high-priority field safety notice for surgeons, employees at medical facilities, and hospitals about the dangers of Physiomesh. That notice asked all relevant medical staff to stop using the Physiomesh product due to a voluntary product recall. At that time, an analysis of data showed that the Physiomesh laparoscopic hernia repair surgery rates were higher than average rates for other similar products on the market.
The patient in this hernia mesh lawsuit underwent hernia repair in Pennsylvania in 2013. In March 2017, the plaintiff returned to the University of Pennsylvania medical center to have the Physiomesh removed due to a bulge in his lower abdomen, problems with the mesh, and chronic lower abdominal pain.
Adhesions to the abdominal wall in the region of the mesh were identified immediately by the physicians involved. The Ethicon hernia mesh lawsuit alleges that manufacturer Johnson and Johnson marketed this product as safe for consumer use without appropriately warning people of the potential short and long-term risks..
The lawyers at McDonald Worley are currently conducting an investigation of any case in which the patient was severely injured or had to go through revision surgery because of the Physiomesh product. Call them today to learn more about your grounds to file an Ethicon hernia mesh lawsuit..
