They come under so many names manufactured by dozens of manufacturers but, the are all Prolene mesh and over 300,000 women have had them implanted. Some where aware of the implantation and others were just going in for a hysterectomy and came out with a mesh.

You have seen it on T.V and the lawsuits are being filed by the thousands as a multi district litigation consolidated in West Virginia for the most part. They are called a vaginal mesh, TVT sling, Transvaginal mesh, TVT, Bladder sling, pelvic mesh, Prolene mesh, surgical mesh, Bladder Neck Suspension Kit, SPARC Sling, MiniArc, Avaulta System, ProteGen Sling, ObTape, Desara Sling, IVS Tunneller I, Gynecare Prolift, TVT, Transvaginal Surgical mesh, Gynemesh, Polyform mesh, Apogee System, Perigee System, Pinnacle, and Advantage cystocele mesh, rectocele mesh, and are used for organ prolapse or urinary incontinence. Some women have one, some have two and some have three. Many have tried to get it removed only to find a new one has taken it's place. Women are in agony. Many can no longer work and others have seen their marriages fall apart. This Prolene mesh of many names makes it impossible to have rerlations without pain. Many women describe it as a knife cutting all the time. This is quite understandable as these synthetic plastic mesh placed inside a womens pelvic area are falling apart and eroding thru the vaginal wall. Many are eroding into the bladder and bowel causing a dangerous medical situation.

This mesh of many names has very severe complications. It can erode right thru the vaginal wall into the vaginal canal. Erode in it's simplest terms means cut right thru. The mesh causes relentless pain and infections that never stop. Many women have been on antibiotics for months on end which in and of itself is dangerous. The mesh can cause bleeding and the return of incontinence and prolapse with a vengence. This can be incontinence and re prolapse of the bladder or the bowel. There can be gastrointestinal problems, lower back pain, pain on one side, leg pain, neurological issues and the result is lives destroyed and severe emotional and psychological problems.

This mesh of many names has caused deaths. Some of these do to medical reasons and some do to choice in reaction to a sense of victimization that there appears to be no end to. Doctors are not listening, and if they have found one there is no longer insurance or funds for surgery. We have talked to women of all ages from 33 to 86. Who would put a mesh into a senior or a women still intent on having children is beyond me. We have spoken to women who have become pregnant with a piece of prolene mesh right there waiting for child birth. Some of it failing apart internally right in the pelvic region with very sharp edges.

With all the warnigs, stories and lawsuits the FDA has not recalled the mesh and many doctors are still putting it in. They believe the ones they put in will not fail. These are just not the ones that are falling apart. Somehow they are the magic doctor. Johnson and Johnson has pulled most of their Gynecare mesh products off the market under the Ethicon label and changed the labeling on one for warnings against vaginal implantation. However, this was just a business decision they say.  There was nothing wrong with the mesh at all.

Many names  yet, all a vaginal mesh.

• A Mesh is A Mesh Is A Mesh
• Pelvitex
• Pelvisoft
• Pelvilace or Pelvicol
• Utrtex
• Uretex TO
• Uretex TOO2
• Uretex TOO3
• A Mesh is a Mesh is A Mesh     
• TVT Exact
• TVT Abbrevo
• TVT Retropubic System
• TVT
• TVT Obturator
• TVT Secur
• Gynemesh PS
• Prolift
• Prolift+M
• MiniArc Precise Single-Incision Sling
• MiniArc Single Incision Sling
• Monarc Subfascial Hammock
• In-Fast Ultra Transvaginal Sling
• BioArc
• Sparc Self-Fixating Sling System
• Elevate
• Perigree
• Apogee
• Arise
• Tyco Covidian Duo
• Mentor ObTape
• Coloplast Mesh
• Pinnacle
• Advantage Fit
• Lynx
• Prefyx PPS
• Scientific Solyx

So many names, so many mesh so much pain and so much suffering.

If you have one of these mesh under so many different names it is still a mesh and you must come forward and fill your pelvic ,msh lawsuit immediately. The statute of limitations is running close. We cannot let anyone be left out. These mesh manufacturers must hear your voices and just must be sort for women everywhere with a mesh.

Do You Have a Vaginal Mesh Lawsuit? Do You Need a Mesh Lawyer?

The vaginal mesh proceedings have begun as a part of the two primary MDL's in West Virginia and New Jersey. Vaginal mesh lead counsels are gearing up and dates have been set.

The  vaginal mesh federal and   state lawsuits are growing  as 1000's of filings  against the vaginal mesh manufacturers proceed and the number continues to grow as more and more women stand up for themselves against the manufacturers  who caused them so much pain and suffering. Federal vaginal mesh lawsuits have been consolidated into four multidistrict litigations (MDL) based on the manufacturer they’re filed against. Vaginal mesh MDL pretrial proceedings are moving in full force with Chief Judge Joseph R. Goodwin, United States District Court, WV, has set a trial date. As of October 2012, the number of suits filed against each manufacturer continues to increase rapidly:

•     1,697 cases filed against AMS
•     1,725 cases filed against Johnson & Johnson’s Ethicon division
•     1,114 cases filed against Boston Scientific
•     1,256 cases filed against C. R. Bard

July 2012, the first case presented to a jury resulted in a $5.5 million damage award in California state court, for a woman who experienced complications where her Bard Avaulta mesh sliced through her colon, causing her to undergo at least eight additional surgeries. Additional lawsuits are scheduled for trial in federal court beginning in February 2013.

The Vaginal Helpline is in full gear to locate any woman with a Prolene mesh filed after 2002 in states where the Statute has not run out.
 

The vaginal mesh lawsuit has moved into the action stage. If you have been injured by a vaginal mesh the time to act is now. The statute of limitations for some state have run out. As the trials poceed and the facts come out it will be more important to have your lawsuit filed and with a law firm that understands the entire MDL process. Differemt criteria may start to develope and if you are not with the correct firm you may find a case rejection letter in your mailbox. Not all firms are using the same critieria. The stiffer the criteria becomes the more important the  firm you choose is. Some have much broader criteria then others. Some law firms want it clean and easy. They do not want more then one mesh implant, only one mesh with one manufacturer, no additonal surgeries or complications, no pressing merdical conditions and a variety of intricate criteria based on the way they see the case and the financial implications for the settlement. Other law firms are using a much wider criteria and still others are taking a case in a state where the statute is over to the state of the manufacturer.

Another important issue is how are your calls and concerns responded to. If your first and only contact is with a paralegal or "screener" that person is your contact person. That is the person that may be your only contact. They must understand the mesh and the suffering you have gone thru. If they can help you find a doctor I would give them an extra plus in the yes category. If they take your case strictly based on prior medical records wothout a doctor intervening on your behalf regarding your current situation it may be harder to prove your case. The best situation for you is a doctor who says it is the mesh and you need a revision of better yet, mesh removal. Having a good doctor is not only good for your case but, a medical necessity.

As the lawsuit proceeds more questions regarding your rights will develope and you will need answers. Interview the first line person.

That may be the most important person. Ask: Who will be my contact person? Has this lawyer ever done any mass tort cases? Has this lawyer been involved in the litigation of cases involving dangerous drugs and devices that harm women? What cases? To what degree?

Will my case stay with you? If it will not under what circumstances will it be referred to another firm? Remember, the MDL lawsuits will require your vaginal mesh lawsuit litigation taken to trial by one of the lead counsels. But, your lawyer can file the case and be the end of the line for the filing process. Do you need a lead counsel? Not everyone can be alead counsel. Some of the best lead counsels have inattentive, insensitive screening staff who really do not understand the mesh litigation at all. Some insensitive staff may  become very strong with you if you even raise the issue of switching lawyers.

If I do not feel my lawyer's staff is senstive to my concerns can I switch?

Yes, you can and there is no financial loss to you at all. If any law firm tells you otherwise they are just wrong and using tactics to keep you with them. That alone should be a sign to reconsider.

The most important thing is that you feel comfortable with the law firm, that they have mass tprt and MDL experience and do know the difference between an aut accident and dangerous drug and device fenseral case. They are not the same. The local lawyer you may pick for the highway accident may not be right for a mass tort. They may have no experience in mass torts and have no intention of wrking your case. They are looking for an experienced mass tort lawyer to send your case to. It may be the next guy that advertises on T,V who they do not even know.

In mass tort cases like the vaginal mesh lawsuit, local may not be the best move at all.  This is an MDL and is only being consolidated in certain states in front of a certain judge. It is not being heard in every state. It may never be litigated in your state. Local is just not all that important.

Fike you lawsuit right away and use care in selecting your vaginal mesh lawyer.

The Vaginal Mesh Helpline will keep you updated on all the most recent news. Our vaginal mesh network of lawyers is filing mesh lawsuits on behalf of women with a failed Prolene mesh. The mesh was used for urinary incontinence in 100's of women.

Published on Saturday 15 September 2012 21:02

Botox injections may help women with urinary incontinence, The Daily Telegraph has today reported. The newspaper said that injecting the muscle-freezing toxin into the wall of the bladder can have a long-lasting impact on overactive bladder syndrome, a major cause of incontinence.

The newspaper’s story is based on a UK medical trial that investigated whether the paralysing properties of botox were effective at reducing the symptoms such as frequently using the toilet, feeling an urgent need to urinate, and leakage in patients with overactive bladder syndrome.

The trial featured 240 women who had not responded to medical treatments for overactive balder syndrome. The researchers found that women who received the botox injection experienced these symptoms significantly less frequently than women who received a dummy injection of saltwater. However, women given botox were more likely to get urinary tract infections.

The results of the study indicate that botox may be effective in treating a common and upsetting health condition. However, if it does get adopted into use in this way there are several other treatment options (including lifestyle measures, bladder training exercises and medication that would be considered first. Botox may be considered as an option only if these treatments fail, and the benefits would have to be considered in relation to its potential harms.

Where did the story come from?

The study was carried out by researchers from the University of Leicester and was funded by the Moulton Charitable Trust and the women’s health charity Wellbeing of Women.

The study was published in the peer-reviewed medical journal European Urology.

The Telegraph covered this study appropriately, covering the study size and design, as well as the treatment benefits and harms.

What kind of research was this?

While it is hard to gauge the true scale of the problem, research suggests that around 13% of women in the UK may have some form of urinary incontinence. Although many conditions and factors can cause urinary incontinence, one major cause is overactive bladder syndrome. The condition is marked by uncontrolled contraction of the bladder that results in an urgent need to pass urine. While this can lead women to need the toilet frequently, some also experience a form of leakage called urge incontinence.

An overactive bladder can be a cause of urge incontinence, which is when urine leaks at the same time or just after you feel an intense urge to pass urine. Urge incontinence differs from stress incontinence, where the pelvic floor muscles are too weak to prevent urination. This causes urine to leak when your bladder is placed under pressure from actions such as coughing or laughing.

This was a placebo-controlled randomised controlled trial that examined the effectiveness and safety of using botulinum toxin (botox) as a treatment for overactive bladder syndrome. A randomised controlled trial is the best way to measure the effectiveness of a treatment, as the randomisation process helps to ensure that any patient characteristics that may influence the outcome have an equal chance of appearing in either treatment group. This allows researchers to be confident that any observed effect is due to the treatment under study.

What did the research involve?

The researchers enrolled 240 women with bladder muscle overactivity, or overactive bladder syndrome, that had not responded to previous treatment. The women were randomly allocated injections of either Botulinum toxin A (botox) or placebo (saltwater) into the wall of the bladder. Women with another common type of incontinence, stress incontinence, were not included in the study.

The participants kept a diary over three days, recording the number of times they:

    emptied their bladder
    felt an urgent need to empty their bladder
    experienced an unintentional passing of urine (or leakage)

The women also completed a questionnaire that assessed their quality of life, as overactive bladder syndrome often has a significant negative impact on patient quality of life.

The researchers conducted follow-up sessions with the women on average at six weeks, three months and six months after treatment. They assessed differences in the frequency of the above three symptoms between the two treatment groups. They also compared quality of life scores, treatment complications and time until troubling symptoms returned between the two groups.

The researchers used appropriate statistical methods to assess differences in frequency of symptoms between the two groups.

What were the basic results?

There were 122 women allocated to the botox treatment group and 118 women allocated to the placebo group.

The researchers compared the outcomes in the botox and placebo groups at the six-month follow-up. They found that in any 24-hour period women in the botox group:

    emptied their bladders less often: 8.33 times versus 9.67 times, a difference of 1.34 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.00 to 2.33, p=0.0001)
    experienced fewer leakage episodes: 1.67 versus 6.00, a difference of 4.33 episodes (95% CI 3.33 to 5.67, p<0.0001)
    experienced fewer episodes of urgency to urinate: 3.83 versus 6.33, a difference of 2.50 episodes (95% CI 1.33 to 3.33, p<0.0001)

Almost a one-third of women in the botox group (31.3%) developed bladder control (or continence) following their treatment, compared to 12.0% in the placebo group (Odds Ratio [OR] 3.12, 95% CI 1.49 to 6.52, p=0.002).

However, urinary tract infection was reported at least once during six months by a one-third of women in the botox treatment group, compared to 10% in the placebo group (OR 3.68, 95% CI 1.72 to 8.25, p=0.0003).

Those given botox also reported greater difficulty emptying their bladders, which required self-catheterisation to remove their urine: 16% of the botox group compared to 4% of the placebo group (OR 4.87, 95% CI 1.52 to 20.33, p=0.003).

How did the researchers interpret the results?

The researchers concluded that injections of botulinum toxin A into the bladder wall is an effective and safe treatment for overactive bladder syndrome in women who have not responded to previous treatment.

Conclusion

Urinary incontinence can be a distressing and problematic condition, and although we cannot be sure of the number of people affected, research suggests it is surprisingly common.

While there is a range of potential treatments and ways to manage urinary incontinence (including medication, bladder training, lifestyle changes and surgery) not all people respond to them, and they can have problems. This randomised controlled trial provided good evidence that botox injections may be a useful treatment option for women with incontinence due to overactive bladder syndrome that has proven difficult to treat with other methods.

The researchers say that the relief of symptoms reported by the participants was considerably better than those who used oral anticholinergic drugs. These drugs act on the nerve supply to the bladder and are the standard medical treatment used for this condition. They add that other randomised controlled trials have reported similar effects.

The researchers say that since they designed their trial, other studies have published results that support using a lower recommended dose of botox for this type of treatment. Therefore, it is unclear if the same results would be found at this reduced dose. They also say that their study recruited participants with severe cases of overactive bladder syndrome, and that it is unclear if the treatment would be as effective in less severe cases.

It is important to note that the study participants did not have stress incontinence, which is a common cause of urinary incontinence. Therefore, the results of this study cannot be generalised to all women with symptoms of overactive bladder or incontinence, but can only be applied to those with diagnosed overactive bladder syndrome (or detrusor overactivity).

Botox is not routinely used by the NHS in this way, but if it were then it would probably be considered as an option only among women who have required specialist referral for their condition. This would be given after they had tried other treatment options first, which may include lifestyle measures and bladder training exercises in addition to oral medications. If these treatments fail, the benefits of botox would have to be considered in relation to its potential harms.

Vaginal Mesh Helpline reports that  a women has finally had enough and protests the vaginal mesh. The Vaginal Mesh Helpline and vaginal mesh lawyers applaud. Perhaps this will become a trend and we will begin to see protests thru-out the country. and is being offered to our readers.
The Vaginal Mesh Helpline is gearing up for what they feel is a second round outreach to some of the largest cities in the United States. "We expect a new wave of T.V ads by lawyers after the election and we are ready."" Women see lawyer ads on T.V and they have alot of questions".Says the helpline medical social worker."They want to speak to someone they feel safe and comfortable with and they call us".

The vaginal mesh lawsuit proceedings have begun" We want all women covered and we want them to get medical and legal help", the helpline representatives tell us. "We have the staff and capacity to help women by offering support and guidance"."They just feel more comfortable with a  social worker then a law firm"

The outreach is a massive undertaking for the Vaginal Mesh Helpline. Their mission is clear and they are ready. They expect to be adding 5-10 new cities a week until they have the major cities in the U.S covered.  The helpline is seeking all women who have not filed their vaginal mesh lawsuit "to stand up and seek justice"

The first round Vaginal Mesh Outreach projected reach the following cities to be:

New York, N.Y.,
Los Angeles, Calif., http://www.vaginalmeshhelpline.com
Chicago, Ill.,
Houston, Tex.,
Philadelphia, Pa,.
Phoenix, Ariz,.
San Antonio, Tex.,
San Diego, Calif.,
Dallas, Tex.,
San Jose, Calif.,

Second vaginal mesh Outreach Campaign

Jacksonville, Fla., http://www.vaginalmeshhelpline.com
Indianapolis, Ind.,
San Francisco, Calif.,
Austin, Tex., http://www.vaginalmeshhelpline.com
Columbus, Ohio,
Fort Worth, Tex.,
Charlotte, N.C.,
Detroit, Mich.,
El Paso, Tex.,
Memphis, Tenn.,

Third round of Vaginal Mesh Outreach

Baltimore, Md.,
Boston, Mass.,
Seattle, Wash.,
Washington, DC,
Nashville,
Denver, Colo.,
Louisville,
Milwaukee, Wis.,
Portland, Ore.,
Las Vegas, Nev.,

Additional Vaginal Mesh Lawsuits Outreach

Oklahoma City, Okla,
Albuquerque, N.M.,
Tucson, Ariz.,
Fresno, Calif.,
Sacramento, Calif.,
Long Beach, Calif.,
Kansas City, Mo.,
Mesa, Ariz.,
Virginia Beach, Va.,
Atlanta, Ga.,
Colorado Springs, Colo.,
Omaha, Nebr.,
Raleigh, N.C.,
Miami, Fla.,
Cleveland, Ohio,
Tulsa, Okla.,
Oakland, Calif,.
Minneapolis, Minn.,
Wichita, Kans.,
Arlington,,

The Vaginal Mesh Helpline is always keeping women updated on new related vaginal mesh news, medical information and vaginal mesh lawsuits. We just found this article and are sharing it with our followers.

Botox Approved, Again, This Time for Urinary Incontinence
By Meredith Melnick | @meredithcm | August 26, 2011 | 54For those of you who have been keeping track, Botox, the symbol of vanity and Bravo’s Real Housewives, actually has a variety of medical uses: it’s government-approved to treat chronic migraines, muscle problems, underarm sweating and a number of other conditions. Now add to that, urinary incontinence.

On Wednesday, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved Botox, or botulinum toxin, to treat incontinence in patients with neurological conditions like spinal cord injury and multiple sclerosis. It’s the seventh condition that Botox has been approved to treat since the drug first arrived on the market as a wrinkle reducer in 2002.

How does it treat urinary incontinence? In some patients with neurological conditions, overactivity in the bladder leads to an inability to store urine. By injecting Botox directly into the bladder to relax it, patients are offered for more muscle control and less incontinence.

In two clinical trials involving 691 patients with incontinence due to spinal cord injury or multiple sclerosis, those who got Botox had a significant reduction in weekly incontinence episodes, compared to a placebo group, the FDA said. The most common adverse effects were urinary tract infection and urinary retention.

Given that incontinence is so difficult to manage — typically involving drugs to relax the bladder and the use of a catheter to empty it — Botox may give some patients another option. One injection may help control incontinence for up to 10 months, the FDA said.

The approval also opens the door to yet more uses for Botox, made by Allergan, the New York Times reported:

    The drug has been studied for more than 100 medical conditions in all, according to Caroline Van Hove, company spokeswoman. “Anything from writer’s cramp to anal fissure to Parkinson’s disease. That’s why we say it’s a pipeline in a vial,” she said Wednesday.

Botox sales reached about $1.5 billion worldwide in 2010, roughly split between cosmetic and therapeutic purposes.

Perhaps this is something that can help after mesh removal. Our vaginal mesh lawyers are currently filing vaginal mesh lawsuits.

The Vaginal Mesh Helpline continues to report on the news that effects women with vaginal mesh complications. The new FDA tracking system comes a little late for the over 300,000 women implanted with vaginal mesh devices and suffering. However, there is hope. This sends a message that our voices have been heard. By filing vaginal mesh lawsuits and standing up for justice you protect yourself and all women from becoming targets of manufacturers who put profits over people.

FDA’s Propose Tracking System Could Reduce Vaginal Mesh Complications
Tracy Ray

The FDA has proposed a new regulation that would require all new medical devices to carry a unique device identifier (UDI). The UDI would be a code of letters and numbers. Such a code would make it much easier to track devices, which in turn would make it much easier to report complications with a particular model or to find out about such problems.

According to the FDA, “A UDI system has the potential to improve the quality of information in medical device adverse event reports, which will help the FDA identify product problems more quickly, better target recalls and improve patient safety.”

For example, if such a tracking system were in place, a doctor who had a patient with stress urinary incontinence (SUI) or pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and wanted to implant a vaginal mesh device could look up the different models by the UDI and immediately see what transvaginal mesh complications, if any, had been reported with each specific model. Likewise, in the event of a recall, a UDI would make the process much more efficient: the company or the FDA would simply announce that the model carrying a particular UDI number was being recalled.

The FDA’s proposal was a response to legislation passed by Congress in 2007 that directed the FDA to develop regulations establishing a unique device identification system for medical devices.
Many women have suffered transvaginal mesh complications

Such a system might enable future patients to avoid problems resulting from transvaginal mesh. Many women have suffered such complications, including pain, infections, mesh erosion, protrusion, vaginal scarring, dyspareunia, and perforation of the bowels, bladder, or blood vessels. Many of these devices were approved under the FDA’s controversial 510(k) approval process, which allows products to be approved without first undergoing clinical trials to prove they are safe.

If the physicians treating these women had been able to easily look up the type of vaginal mesh device they were considering implanting, and immediately see reports of problems associated with the device, they would have been able to weight the risks and make an informed decision about whether to implant that particular device.
Vaginal mesh MDL consolidated lawsuits

Many women who have suffered complications have filed vaginal mesh lawsuits in order to get compensation for their pain, suffering, and reduced quality of life. Most of these lawsuits charge that the manufacturers of these devices did not test them for safety before putting the on the market and failed to warn the public of the devices’ risks. A number of federal lawsuits have been consolidated in a vaginal mesh MDL in West Virginia.

For help call the Vaginal Mesh Helpline and Vaginal Mesh Support Group today, Let us help you find and vaginal mesh lawyer and doctor.

The  Mesh Helpline still hears from women who are having complications and just realized it is from the mesh. Most of these women have seen a lawyer ad on T.V which alerts them to realize they are not alone and that their doctors are giving them the run around. Other women are disenchanted with the T.V ad lawyer they hired or a local lawyer who has sent the case to another lawyer someplace else. There are some basic vaginal mesh guidelines:

Vaginal mesh complications include pain, leakage or incontinence or the bladder or bowel, parch bleeding, infection, pain during sexual intercourse, lower back pain, pain on one side of the body, abdominal pain and difficulty standing for long periods

You are not alone. Close to 400,000 women have vaginal mesh or bladder sling implants

A vaginal mesh comes in many varieties, made by many different manufufacturers. They can be called a sling, a transvaginal mesh, a TVT sling, a bladder sling, a surgical mesh, a vaginal patch and it is still a mesh and part of the Vaginal mesh lawsuts currently underway.

For the men: Sexual intercourse is indeed painful for your wife. She is not lying or making it up. But, with the right doctor there is hope of resuming a normal life. Many men are sueing with their spouse. A California husband just got an award  for $500,000 for loss of intimacy in the relationship.

The mesh can be removed and your body repaired with sutures or another means. A urogynecologist is usually a mesh specialist although a GYN surgeon or urologist can remove the mesh. You must ask the doctors office if the doctor has ever removed a mesh and you must get a straight answer.

Physical therapy will not help the mesh and may be dangerous by pushing it into an organ. This is not a good idea. Estrogen creme will not necessarily help either. You must look into mesh removal.

The vaginal mesh lawsuits are currently underway. It is important to retain a lawyer, and the right lawyer, asap. Statutes of limitations are running out in some states. You will have to go to a doctor to get a statement that you have a mesh problem. If you rely on old medical records it may become harder to prove your case. The best situation is to have a statement in the record that mesh removal or alteration is needed and that you have a mesh issue.

Additional Important Information

Surgical mesh was designed in the 1950s to correct abdominal hernias. The woven material is placed below the skin to patch the abdominal hole and block intestines and other tissues from protruding through the abdominal wall.

Surgical mesh can be made of biological materials or synthetic materials like polypropylene, polytetrafluoroethylene, polyester fibers or stainless steel. The size, shape, thickness and flexibility vary based on the surgeon’s needs. Often, the mesh comes in a prepackaged kit with the necessary tools, to make the procedure easier.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reports that hundreds of thousands of hernia repair surgeries are performed each year — with and without surgical mesh — and patients typically recover quickly. However, the FDA has received reports of adverse reactions to the mesh, adhesions (where the loops of the intestines attach to each other or the mesh), and injury to organs, nerves or blood vessels.

Overall, the treatment of hernias with surgical mesh is considered successful, so doctors wanted to use it in other parts of the body that required additional support. In the 1970s, they began inserting surgical mesh abdominally to treat pelvic organ prolapse (POP). In 1996, the FDA approved the first mesh product for treatment of stress urinary incontinence (SUI). The first mesh product for treatment of prolapse was approved in 2002.

Instead of inserting the mesh through abdominal incisions, however, surgeons have recently embraced the idea of implanting the mesh transvaginally (through the vagina). This choice has been disastrous for thousands of women, who have suffered severe complications such as organ perforation and erosion of the mesh. Even revision surgeries cannot always remove the mesh or correct the internal trauma.
Transvaginal Mesh and Pelvic Organ Prolapse

To treat pelvic organ prolapse, surgical mesh can be implanted at the time of a hysterectomy or as a separate surgery. When surgical mesh is inserted through the vagina, it is referred to as transvaginal mesh.

Pelvic organ prolapse is a condition in which the bladder, top of the vagina, uterus, rectum or bowel has descended from its normal position. The condition is thought to be the result of weakened pelvic muscles, usually from pregnancy and childbirth. Of the 300,000 surgical procedures done to correct prolapse in 2010, 100,000 used mesh and 75,000 of those were completed transvaginally.

When transvaginal mesh is used to repair prolapse, the surgeon uses the woven material to create a hammock-like structure under the drooping organ or organs. Once in place, the mesh is anchored to muscles or ligaments by sutures or other devices. Over time, the patient’s tissues grow and fill in the pores of the mesh to keep it stable. The hammock, in turn, maintains the correct position of the affected organ.
To treat prolapse, transvaginal mesh is most commonly placed in these locations:

    The anterior vaginal wall to correct a bladder prolapse.
    The posterior vaginal wall to correct a rectal prolapse.
    The top of the vagina to correct a uterine prolapse.

The most common and serious of the complications for patients is the erosion, or extrusion, of the mesh into nearby organs. This can lead to bleeding, pain during sexual intercourse and urinary problems. Revision surgeries may not fix the problem. And if the patient’s tissues have already grown through the mesh, removal may be impossible.
Transvaginal Mesh and Stress Urinary Incontinence

Surgical mesh can also be used to create a bladder sling that is positioned under the urethra and bladder neck and anchored on the sides. The bladder sling is designed to treat stress urinary incontinence (SUI), which occurs when the bladder is stressed by an everyday activity, such as sneezing or laughing, and subsequently leaks urine. The sling keeps the urethra and bladder neck closed during normal activities, stopping the leakage. In 2010, nearly 260,000 surgeries were performed to correct SUI. Of those, 80 percent were performed using surgical mesh implanted transvaginally.

When a bladder sling is inserted through the vagina, it is known as transvaginal mesh. Typically, small abdominal incisions are also used.
Among the most popular bladder slings:

    Tension-free vaginal tape (TVT): A polypropylene mesh tape is used under the urethra and is held in place by the patient’s body.
    Transobturator tape (TOT): Less invasive than TVT, because there is no need to use a large needle when inserting it.
    Mini-sling: Eliminates the need for abdominal incisions. A metallic inserter and a vaginal incision are used to place the mesh tape.

As with prolapse surgery, there have been widespread reports of serious complications after bladder sling surgery using transvaginal mesh. Many patients have prolonged difficulty urinating or they incur new symptoms of incontinence, specifically urgency. In addition, they run the risk of the slings eroding into nearby structures, organ perforation, infection at the surgery site and internal bleeding.
Transvaginal Mesh and the FDA

Between 2005 and 2007, the FDA received 1,000 reports of complications and injuries related to transvaginal mesh surgeries, including death. The FDA decided to begin studying the medical device in October 2008. The FDA reported that between 2008 and 2010, there were nearly 2,900 reports of injuries caused by transvaginal mesh.

By July 2011, the federal agency concluded in a public safety update that complications with the use of transvaginal mesh for treatment of prolapse are not rare and that mesh repairs are no more effective than non-mesh repairs for treating prolapse.

The FDA took its concern a step further in January 2012, stating that after studying years of scientific data and recommendations from the September 2011 Obstetrics-Gynecology Devices Panel meeting, it was considering reclassifying transvaginal mesh as a high-risk device. If that happens, mesh devices will be subjected to more rigorous testing, including clinical trials with humans.

In that same update, the FDA requested safety data from all surgical mesh manufacturers and ordered post-market studies from seven manufacturers of single-incision mini-slings for SUI and 33 manufacturers of surgical mesh for prolapse.

If you need help with your vaginal mesh call the Vaginal Mesh Helpline today.

The Vaginal Mesh Helpline is seeking all women with a vaginal mesh to help you  file your vaginal mesh lawsuit. Ladies, please do not wait. Time is running out. This couple won and won big. Justice spoke and responded to their suffering. Many women we speak to are waiting. Do not wait. Some of the state statutes are running close. See the settlement for this couple below.

Couple wins landmark trial against  Vaginal Mesh medical company. File Your vaginal Mesh lawsuit today. Call the vaginal mesh helpline and get a vaginal mesh lawyer that will work with your best interests at heart. This couple won big and they did not get their case referred around the country from lawyer to lawyer. You must get a vaginal mesh lawyer who is keeping your case or works with a known lead lawyer. KNow where your case is. Get the vaginal mesh settlement you deserve.

Legal and medical professionals from across the country are paying very close attention to a groundbreaking verdict that happened in Bakersfield. For the first time in the nation, a jury has awarded a local couple $5.5 million against the maker of a medical implant, claiming they knew their product was unsafe. Christine Scott got the official news Monday morning at Kern County Superior Courthouse. She had a vaginal mesh surgically implanted and has had complications ever since. She and her husband sued the maker and won, making it the first victory of its kind in the nation. "I was like 'Thank you, God.' We can finally get the word out to women," said Scott after the verdict. After some four years of legal battles and court-ordered silence with the maker of the Avaulta Mesh, C.R. Bard Medical, Scott gets some relief from the victory. An active runner, Scott got the implant to correct a leaky bladder. But, the device began cutting her colon, and tissue continues to grow through the tiny holes in the mesh. She had already had eight surgeries when we first met Scott last month. "I don't know if I'll have ten surgeries now. I don't know if I'll have one. I don't know if I'll have 100. The doctors cannot tell me," Scott said in June. A jury awarded Scott $5 million and her husband $500,000, claiming the mesh has ruined their love life. It's a landmark victory, the first of its kind in the country. The Securities and Exchange Commission indicates 47,000 women have had the mesh implanted, and 650 lawsuits are pending. "In fact, this case, they advertised it as FDA-approved. It's not. It's a crime," said Gene Lorenz, a lawyer representing Scott. The lawyer for C.R. Bard Medical says the company stopped selling the Avaulta Mesh on July 1, 2012 in the United States because the FDA wanted more clinical trials done. But, it's still sold in other countries. "This is a product that has been cleared for use by the FDA and can be safe and effective when used properly and for the right patient," said Michael Brown, attorney for C.R. Bard Medical. "They tested this on 16 rats, 12 rabbits, four sheep and, by their own researcher's admission, the next living being this product went into was women," said Elaine Houghton, Scott's attorney. Scott says she will continue to deal with complications from the mesh, while being a voice for other women. "The hardest part, I will tell you, through this whole thing, is having to keep quiet, watching women still get hurt. But, I was legally not able to get out there and tell and that, I'm sorry," said Scott holding back tears. "And, that every day I was like please be over so I can talk. So, when I got that verdict it was like 'Thank you God.' Now we can do something." There will likely be an appeal in the case, but Scott says she's just happy to no longer have the court-ordered silence, so she can talk about it. She wants to start a support group for women. And, her lawyers are working on a website for people wanting to know more about mesh implants. They hope to have that up and running by Monday.

Call us today and let us help you find a vaginal mesh lawyer and doctor. With so many lawyers advertising and so few doctors willing to help it is very difficult to know what to do. Call and speak to our female medical social worker today.

Vaginal Mesh Helpline  is provideng vaginal mesh support and Avaulta mesh lawyers for women with complications from the Bard Avaulta Vaginall Mesh. Like all mesh implants  the Bard Avaulta Vaginal Mesh was used for prolapse or unrinary incontinence and is causing all the classic mesh complications.

C.R. Bard's products include:

        Bard Pelvitex
        Bard Pelvisoft
        Bard Pelvilace or Pelvicol
        Bard Utrtex
        Bard Uretex TO
        Bard Uretex TOO2
        Bard Uretex TOO3
 

Complications with Bard Avaulta Vaginal Mesh Include:

•     Severe physical pain
•     erosion of the mesh
•     pain during sexual intercourse
•     Difficulty voiding
•     patch bleeding
•     lower back pain
•     Reoccurrence of POP or SUI
•     Severe infection
•     Urinary  related problems

Bard Avaulta Mesh Lawyers are filing lawsuits for women with complications from the Bard Avaulta Vaginal mesh.
 
If you have complications from a Bard Avaulta vaginal mesh do not wait because the first Bellwether trial is  scheduled in the Bard Avaulta Mesh Implant MDL

The trial is now set to begin on February 5, 2013 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia.

The purpose of bellwether trials is for both parties to get an idea of how juries will respond to common evidence in representative trials. They can then use this information to negotiate settlements, to plan their strategy for future trials, or to serve as precedents. In January, Judge Goodwin told the attorneys in the Bard MDL to compile a list of possible bellwether cases. Now that a date has been set for the first bellwether trial, a schedule will be established for the discovery process so that the pre-trial proceedings can begin.

You must retain an experienced multi district litigation lawyer immediately. Call the Bard Avaulta vaginal mesh helpline today.