Ethicon Inc. and parent company Johnson & Johnson are facing a new Prolene mesh hernia lawsuit, alleging the companies’ product had caused the claimant serious and permanent injuries.

This Prolene mesh hernia lawsuit alleges Ethicon and Johnson & Johnson failed to disclose the dull severity of potential device complications associated with their product.

Plaintiff William C. filed this Prolene mesh hernia lawsuit after discovering other patients had suffered similar injuries related to this product, with many of them opting to file legal action and eventually form a multidistrict litigation.

According to the Prolene mesh hernia lawsuit, William underwent surgery on May 29, 2013, and had the Prolene Hernia System implanted to repair an inguinal hernia.

The Prolene Hernia System was reportedly implanted according to instructions, with surgeons and physicians having no reason to believe William was at risk for any serious device complications. This allegedly changed not long after the surgery, with William having to undergo a revision procedure to get the Prolene Hernia System removed.

According to the Prolene mesh hernia lawsuit, William underwent revision surgery on Nov. 14, 2016, with surgeons reportedly discovering that a large mass of fibrous tissue had formed in the hernia area.

The mass was reportedly found under the surface of the Prolene Hernia System, specifically stuck to the internal ring of the device. Surgeons were able to remove the Prolene Hernia System, William says, but he remains at high risk for latent hernia mesh complications.

Overview of Hernia Mesh Complications

The Prolene Hernia System consists of two distinct layers of polypropylene connected by a central polypropylene tube, which is unique compared to other hernia repair products.

The polypropylene material is specifically designed to spur inflammation in the surrounding tissue, which is supposed to help encourage healing in the hernia. This is supposed to help prevent hernia recurrence and chronic pain, but it has been allegedly causing numerous patients painful side effects.

While inflammation may help the hernia heal, it can also cause adverse reactions like fever and other flu like symptoms. In addition, the patient’s condition can become severely worsened if they develop a fever and biofilm formations.

Biofilms are highly organized colonies of bacteria that are resistant to antibiotics, which means that only revision surgery can resolve the infection at that point. It is important to note that revision surgery is considered riskier than the initial implant surgery, due to a higher risk of infection.

Even though these hernia mesh complications can be devastating to patients, patients claim Ethicon and Johnson & Johnson allegedly failed to disclose this information to the public. At all times relevant, William says he and his physicians had relied on the product information and marketing information provided by the companies.

William states he would not have agreed to have the Prolene Hernia System implanted if he had known about the potential complications.

William’s Prolene mesh hernia lawsuit is joining MDL No. 7400, where it will be streamlined through the litigation process and avoid potential problems like conflicting rulings from different judges. He is raising several claims in his Prolene mesh hernia lawsuit, including counts of negligence and failure to warn.

This Prolene Mesh Hernia Lawsuit is Case No. 3:18-cv-16156, in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Middlesex County.