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.

Use of Vaginal Sling During Surgery Linked to Increased Urethral Sling Complications 1 877 522-2123

Vaginal Mesh Helpline Medical  Update reports on a June 21, 2012 study published in The New England Journal of Medicine, which found that though the insertion of a vaginal sling during surgery decreases the chances of postoperative urinary incontinence, it carries higher risks of urethral sling complications.*

The study analyzed data from 337 participants who underwent surgery to treat pelvic organ prolapse (“POP”) between May 2007 and October 2009. The women were randomly assigned either a vaginal sling or sham incisions. The study found:

        After three months, 23.6 percent of women with the sling had urinary incontinence, compared to 49.4 percent without a vaginal sling.

        After 12 months, 27.3 percent of patients with the sling suffered from urinary incontinence, compared to 43 percent of those without.

        Those implanted with the sling suffered complications. Nearly seven percent of the sling group suffered bladder perforation, versus none in the control group.

        31 percent of women experienced urinary tract infections as a urethral sling complication, versus 18.3 percent in the non-sling group.

        Bleeding complications occurred in 3.1 percent of the sling group; incomplete bladder emptying occurred in 3.7 percent of the sling group. Neither occurred at all in the non-sling group.

Urethral Sling Complications Adds To Concerns About Vaginal Mesh Side Effects

According to an accompany commentary to the study, vaginal mesh slings are different from other types of transvaginal mesh used for POP repair. The slings are small and shaped like straps, approximately 1 cm wide and 10 cm long, while vaginal mesh sheets can span up to 10 cm wide and 20 cm long. In September 2011, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) convened a panel to evaluate the safety of vaginal mesh implants. Although the agency recommended post market studies for transvaginal mesh, they did not require such studies for midurethral slings. The latest study raises questions about the risks and benefits of vaginal mesh slings. The FDA noted that the vaginal sling provides an “anatomic” benefit, but may not result in better symptomatic results. Since the study was limited to a one year follow up, the long-term consequences of urethral sling complications are still unknown.

Current vaginal mesh lawsuits are increasing. There are numerous vaginal mesh related implants creating severe complications. Many women do not realize that all of these are mesh devices and are part of the huge vaginal mesh lawsuits. The Vaginal mesh helpline currently has a number of pre screened experienced Tort lawyers  for women seeking to file vaginal mesh lawsuits. We cxan also help with doctors in some states.

You have been probably reading alot lately about the mesh and the fact that it is a Multi District litigation. In fact that is what this lawsuit is. The vaginal mesh is not a class action lawsuit. Your case is filed locally and then moved to the appropriate MDl  that the manufacturer of your vaginal mesh has been assigned to.

What is a MUlti District litigation ?

Multidistrict litigation is a procedure utilized in the federal court system to transfer to one federal judge all pending civil cases of a similar type filed throughout the United States. The decision whether cases should be transferred is made by a panel of seven federal judges appointed by the Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court. The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation meets periodically to review requests that cases be consolidated for pretrial matters pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407

Vaginal mesh MDL'S

In December 2008, all Mentor ObTape lawsuits pending in federal courts were consolidated for MDL in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia, before the Honorable Judge Clay D. Land. In October 2010, 36 lawsuits against Bard (manufacturer of one brand of vaginal mesh) were consolidated for MDL in the Southern District of West Virginia; the number of included cases has since grown to nearly 300. The first vaginal mesh bellwether trial against Bard is scheduled to begin on February 15, 2013. Later, in February 2012, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation created three additional MDLs in the Southern District of West Virginia; the defendants are: American Medical Systems; Boston Scientific; and Ethicon. Also in October 2010, Judge Carol E. Higbee of the Superior Court of New Jersey ruled in favor of centralized management for all current and future complaints against manufacturers Johnson &Johnson and Bard (more than 400 such cases have currently been filed). The New Jersey cases are not part of a federal MDL, but are being managed on a state level.

A motion has been filed to create a sixth transvaginal mesh MDL, involving lawsuits over Coloplast pelvic mesh, and a panel of federal judges will meet later this month to consider whether the cases should be consolidated for pretrial proceedings and centralized before the same judge in West Virginia who is presiding over cases involving similar products sold by other manufacturers.

To Summarize the vaginal mesh MDL

There are currently four different MDLs (multidistrict litigations) centralized before Chief District Judge Joseph R. Goodwin in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, involving lawsuits over transvaginal mesh products sold by C.R. Bard, American Medical Systems (AMS), Boston Scientific and Ethicon.

A fifth MDL, which was established in 2004 for lawsuits involving Mentor ObTape, is centralized in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia. However, many of the Mentor ObTape lawsuits have already settled and the litigation is at a very advanced stage.

Update on Vaginal Mesh Proceedings

Judge Issues Order to Proceed with Discovery in Vaginal Mesh MDL
Emma Gonzalez | July 6th, 2012 |

On June 14, 2012, Chief District Judge Joseph R. Goodwin, who presides over the U.S. District Court for the Western District of West Virginia, issued a pretrial order to proceed with discovery processes in the transvaginal mesh lawsuit MDL. In laymen’s terms, this means that lawyers for the plaintiffs, who allege a variety of vaginal mesh problems, are now able to request evidence, documentation and other paperwork from product manufactures and defendant companies.
Discovery to seek evidence of vaginal mesh problems

True to name, discovery is a legal term for the pretrial process of “discovering” evidence from the opposing party. In this case, Judge Goodwin has authorized vaginal mesh attorneys to seek depositions, interrogatories (fact-gathering questionnaires), and other supporting documentation from vaginal mesh manufacturers and other named defendants. Judge Goodwin’s order is a very important step for the MDL, as it allows counsel to prepare for the first trials.
Judge presides over four transvaginal mesh lawsuit MDL’s

Judge Goodwin will preside over several transvaginal mesh lawsuit MDL’s – those against American Medical Systems, Boston Scientific, C.R. Bard, and Ethicon. While Judge Goodwin has been assigned to the C.R. Bard MDL since 2010, it was not until 2012 that the other three were consolidated and appended to his court docket. The four MDL’s consolidate cases from thousands of women, and currently number 333 against AMS, 182 against Boston Scientific, 411 against C.R. Bard, and 253 against Ethicon. MDL numbers are growing fast, and this rapid rate is not expected to decrease in the near future.
Vaginal mesh attorneys cite range of complications

MDL plaintiffs allege several vaginal mesh problems, among them pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence aggravated by vaginal mesh. Additionally, women report chronic infection, bleeding, vaginal scarring, severe discomfort, and pain during intercourse. For some, what was meant to be a solution to their problems results in device erosion – deterioration of the implant – or extrusion, in other words, dislocation of the implant to such a point that it protrudes into the vaginal canal. In the worst of cases, women allege that their defective implants cannot be completely removed, even after multiple surgeries.

It is important to understand that a local lawyer is not necessary for the Vaginal mesh lawsuits. That lawyer will not necessarily be a part of the proceedings but, will most likely be seniding your case to another law firm that is equipped to handle mass torts.

Lead Counsels and the vaginal mesh MDL

On April 13th, Chief Judge Joseph R. Goodwin held a hearing to consider what MDL attorneys will be appointed to serve as lead counsel for the plaintiffs in the consolidated transvaginal mesh litigation.  Attiorneys from around the country comprise the Executive Committee and fifty firms comprise the PSC.

That is why it is extremely important for you to hire an end of the line lawyer so that your casr is not moved from a local law firm to a larger law firm to the MDL lead counsel. Many lead counsels are just end of the libne lawyers and are not taking cases, others are. Your attorney must be familiar with the MDL process. for the Vaginal mesh Helpline dial 1 877 522-2123