C.R. Bard is facing a new hernia mesh lawsuit, which was recently filed by a man from Indiana alleging he suffered serious complications from the company’s 3DMax hernia mesh. The plaintiff says the company failed to warn him and his doctor against the allegedly defective nature of the 3DMax hernia mesh.

Plaintiff Gary B. says he filed the claim soon after discovering that certain components of the 3DMax hernia mesh had made device complications more likely, later forcing him to undergo revision surgery.

3DMax Hernia Mesh

The 3DMax hernia mesh consists of a polypropylene material — supposedly safer for biological implantation in humans.

The polypropylene mesh is supposed to cause inflammation of the abdominal tissue that is supposed to help heal the hernia. C.R. Bard had marketed the 3DMAx hernia mesh product as a safe and reliable treatment for hernia repair, and according to Gary, the company allegedly made no mention of potential device complications.

With these benefits in mind, Gary says he had the 3DMax hernia mesh implanted on his right side on Nov. 18, 2010. While Gary suffered no initial complications, he alleges soon suffered hernia mesh complications after the surgery.

Soon after reporting the debilitating pain to his doctor, Gary says he underwent revision surgery on Aug. 8, 2016 and doctors discovered that he had been suffering from hernia recurrence and possible hernia erosion.

Even after this procedure, Gary says he continues to suffer chronic pain in the alleged result of the defective nature of the 3DMax hernia mesh.

Overview of Hernia Mesh Complications

Like other hernia mesh systems, 3DMax hernia mesh is composed of a polypropylene material that is designed to spur inflammation of the abdominal muscle. By triggering the muscle inflammation, the hernia repair is supposed to progress at a faster rate and make the recovery process faster.

While most cases of inflammation eventually settle, there are cases where it does not and can evolve into infection. Hernia mesh infection can cause the formation of biofilms, or groups of highly resistant bacteria. While antibiotics can treat the symptoms, only revision surgery can resolve the cause of the infection.

It is important to note that revision surgery is considered more difficult than the initial procedure because it also carries an additional risk of infection. Furthermore, hernia recurrence can occur in cases of hernia mesh failure, potentially compounding the patient’s condition.

To lower the chances of biofilm development, patients should look out for any signs of hernia mesh infection including debilitating pain, heat radiating off of the incision site, and the incision site not healing properly.

Even though these hernia mesh complications can be devastating to patients, Gary alleges C.R. Bard allegedly failed to disclose this information to the general public. At all times relevant, Gary says he and his physician had relied on the marketing materials and product information presented by C.R. Bard.

Furthermore, Gary says he followed all recovery instructions after the hernia repair surgery but still suffered serious hernia mesh complications. Gary states he would not have agreed to have the 3DMax hernia mesh implanted, if he had known about the potential device complications.

Gary is seeking multiple damages in this hernia mesh lawsuit, including counts of negligence and failure to warn.

The 3DMax Hernia Mesh Lawsuit is Case No. 3:18-cv-00135-RLY-MPB, in the U.S. District Court of Southern Indiana.