A man whose wife died of cancer after uterine fibroid surgery filed a morcellation cancer lawsuit against the several manufacturers of power morcellators, saying their device caused the spreading and progression of his wife’s cancer.

Plaintiff Jerry W. of North Carolina was the husband of the late Bethann W. and is now the executor of her estate. Jerry says that Bethann underwent laparoscopic surgery in March 2012 to remove uterine fibroids. The fibroids were removed using a power morcellator made by the defendants.

In October 2012, she went to the emergency room complaining of headache, fatigue, malaise, and symptoms resembling those of a urinary tract infection. Imaging studies revealed masses in her abdomen that appeared to be leiomyomas. After surgery to remove the masses, they were diagnosed as high-grade leiomyosarcoma.

After a round of chemotherapy, her cancer returned in December 2013, this time invading her bladder. The cancer continued to progress despite further surgery and chemotherapy until she finally died in September.

Power Morcellator Blamed in Death

Jerry now attributes Bethann’s cancer and resulting death to the power morcellator used during her surgery. A power morcellator is a device used in laparoscopic surgery to cut larger masses of tissue into smaller pieces that can be more easily removed through smaller incisions.

This allows procedures like hysterectomy and fibroid removal surgery to be less invasive, which results in less pain, shorter recovery time and reduced risk of complications.

The problem with power morcellators that has recently generated so much controversy and litigation is the possibility that they can inadvertently spread cancer cells. The FDA estimates that about one in 350 women who undergo hysterectomy or fibroid removal surgery has a uterine sarcoma that goes undetected prior to surgery.

According to Jerry’s morcellation cancer lawsuit, certain types of cancers can mimic the appearance of benign uterine fibroids, making them difficult or impossible to detect prior to surgery. Morcellation can leave fragments of this cancerous tissue loose inside the abdomen, causing the cancer to spread and upstage.

Jerry alleges that the manufacturers of power morcellators knew about the risk of morcellation cancer for years without properly alerting physicians or their patients to that risk.

At the time of his wife’s surgery, he says, the only warning provided with the instructions for the power morcellator used in her surgery was a recommendation to use a tissue extraction bag in the presence of tissue suspected of being malignant, to contain that tissue and keep it from spreading. The warning did not address the possibility that cancerous tissue may have gone undetected prior to surgery.

Jerry also argues that power morcellators should have been designed and sold with an extraction bag to contain all morcellated tissue, and that to sell the devices without such a system was a failure to satisfy the standard of care the manufacturers owed to patients. The devices, as sold, were defective in design and unsafe for their intended purpose, he says.

Jerry’s morcellation cancer lawsuit asserts claims based on theories of negligence, defective design, failure to warn, breach of warranty, and violation of the North Carolina Consumer Practices Act. On his own behalf, Jerry is also bringing claims for wrongful death and loss of consortium.

The Morcellation Cancer Lawsuit is Case no. 3:15-CV-7669, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.