Married complainants filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida on April 23, 2018, against C.R. Bard Inc., manufacturers of the Bard hernia mesh known as the Ventralex Hernia Patch.

Plaintiffs David I. and his wife allege that this Bard hernia mesh is defective and responsible for injuries he endured after hernia repair surgery.

According to the Bard hernia mesh lawsuit, David experienced a very active, athletic lifestyle prior to his hernia repair that involved gardening, sport fishing, and even cycling.

Due to the complications and injuries that he alleges are a direct consequence of the use of the Bard hernia mesh made of polypropylene, he is now unable to engage in these activities. He says he experiences daily pain and suffering and has an abdominal deformity. His wife joins this lawsuit with a claim of loss of consortium.

The narrative of the lawsuit indicates that the Bard hernia mesh is not bio-compatible, and the body often treats the polypropylene as if it were an invading foreign body.

Alleged inflammatory responses to this material can cause chronic pain, abscesses, pseudo-tumors, and even infection. Other adverse effects of this Bard hernia mesh product have been reported as a migration of the patch, perforation of vital organs, internal bleeding, and injury to nerves surrounding implant.

The lawsuit also purports that repeat surgeries are often needed with the Ventralex Hernia Patch and other Bard hernia mesh products. Those surgeries often involve repetitive treatment for a recurrent hernia along with retrieval of the old device.

The Ventralex Hernia Patch is not the only C.R. Bard hernia mesh product to be brought into the limelight. According to federal court records, C.R. Bard Inc. is subject to over 50 product liability claims for their hernia repair implants of which Ventralex and Perfix devices are just two.

Plaintiffs in these cases purport that the devices are defectively designed and, once implanted, can be the source of horrific internal injury.

In early April 2018, several of these plaintiffs sought to funnel cases into a single federal court for systematic and efficient processing. They did this by filing a request with the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. It is hoped this action will move their claims along and resolve redundant and or conflicting court actions.

Polypropylene Mesh products from other companies have also come under fire. Johnson & Johnson Inc.’s subsidiary Ethicon is facing litigation for its Physiomesh composite mesh patches. Atrium Medical Corp. has also faced litigation for its C-Qur Mesh implants.

Federal claims against the Physiomesh product has been aggregated under Multidistrict Litigation in the Northern District of Georgia already. C-Qur implant cases have been grouped and funneled in like fashion to the District of New Hampshire.

Have you or a loved one been injured by a Bard, Ethicon, or Atrium hernia mesh product? You could have a legal claim.

The C.R. Bard Lawsuit is Case No. 3:18-cv-548-J-34JRK in U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida.