Women who received trans-vaginal mesh to remedy POP, pelvic organ prolapse and stress-urinary incontinence have been exposed to the risk of grave vaginal mesh complications. Women have reported problems such as mesh erosion, painful intercourse, and severe abdominal pain since trans-vaginal mesh was introduced on the market in 1996.
Vaginal-mesh complications include:
- Shrinkage or contraction of the mesh
- Continued infections circling the mesh area
- Urinary incontinence and other urinary difficulties
- -Mesh erosion
- Stomach pain, which may spread to the vagina, pelvis, or leg
- Puncture of the bowl or bladder during surgery
In 2011, the FDA published a safety warning, clarifying that the side effects linked to vaginal mesh were not uncommon, and patients should be made aware of the hazards before surgery. Until now, a broad scale vaginal-mesh recall has not taken place even though some products have been taken off the market by their manufacturers.
Vaginal Mesh News Update
The initial trans-vaginal mesh MDL, multi-district litigation, case going to trial has named American Medical Systems as the defendant. Several hundred lawsuits pointing at vaginal-mesh manufacturers have been combined with U.S. District Judge Joseph R. Goodwin, supervising five trans-vaginal mesh MDL’s that begins on February 5, 2013.
Lawsuits against AMS are becoming more prevalent. Not too long ago, a woman from Connecticut alleged that the company’s Monarch-Sling caused complications with the vaginal mesh. The lawsuit claims that AMS’s trans-vaginal mesh sling has a faulty design and testing was inadequate prior to being put on the market and implanted in patients.
Several trans-vaginal mesh products produced by AMS are utilized to treat SUI, stress urinary-incontinence and POP, pelvic organ-prolapse. Unfortunately, many women developed additional severe incontinence following surgical implantations of the product. The FDA became inundated with over 1,000 complaints linked to trans-vaginal mesh between 2005 and 2007. That amount increased three times as much between 2008 and 2010. However, when the FDA notified healthcare providers and patients in July 2011 that the trans-vaginal mesh might expose patients to an increased risk than non-mesh treatments many women were already suffering.
Many feel that the number of lawsuits concerning trans-vaginal mesh products is just the beginning. Dr. Amir Shriati, a gynecological urologist, states that the difficulties documented from 2008-2010 only stand for around 1% or less of the many hundreds of thousands of trans-vaginal mesh devices used in those two years alone! Many believe the complication ratio is closer to 10%. Claims can be filed against AMS; however, claims are susceptible to the SOL, statute of limitations. Delaying filing a claim may limit an individual’s right to monetary compensation.
If the initial vaginal-mesh lawyers have success in relation to the case against the manufacturer, it may become easier for further vaginal-mesh settlements to proceed without the necessity for extra trials. Nonetheless, for some, suffering with the awful side-effects of trans-vaginal mesh devices is too little too late. The extreme suffering, continued surgeries, and deterioration of the exact problem the initial surgery was suppose to correct has become nearly unbearable.
Even though suffers may receive financial compensation; there is no substitute for the lifelong suffering they will have to endure. From 2005-2010 there were roughly 4,000 complaints related to trans-vaginal mesh products, along with three deaths. Regrettably, these types of cases will continue until the lives of people are put before the profits of manufacturers.