On May 16, 2017, plaintiff Mary J. filed a hernia mesh failure lawsuit against Johnson & Johnson and Ethicon Inc. in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida.

According to her complaint, Mary J. suffered from a ventral hernia – an area of weakness in the abdominal muscle wall where underlying intestinal tissue has poked through – which was repaired with Physiomesh, a Johnson & Johnson product made by its subsidiary, Ethicon Inc. She alleges her implantation with Physiomesh ultimately led to hernia mesh failure.

Johnson & Johnson, the pharmaceutical and medical device and supply giant based in New Brunswick, New Jersey, is the parent company of Ethicon Inc., which is responsible for the “design, development, promotion, marketing, testing, distribution, and sale of hernia mesh repair products” in question.

Ventral hernias can occur anywhere in the abdominal region, but they usually occur because of a genetic area of weakness or around the site of a previous surgical incision.

Cutting through the muscle tissue can make it prone to weakness, allowing colonic tissue to become wedged, pinched and dangerously blood-constricted.

Physiomesh Allegedly Led to Hernia Mesh Failure in Plaintiff

Mary J., the plaintiff, says she had her ventral hernia repaired with Physiomesh Composite mesh in 2011. Physiomesh is a product designed to be implanted permanently and act as a secondary strengthening device for the muscle wall.

In 2013, the plaintiff needed to undergo an additional surgery to investigate the cause of physical pain in the region of the former hernia.

Upon investigation, the laparoscopically-implanted Physiomesh had not grown into the abdominal wall in the two years since the initial surgery as expected. The hernia had reoccurred along with concurrent infection. The surgeons also reported finding adhesions, a gluing effect which occurs because of a post-surgical build-up of scar tissue.

According to Mary’s allegations, Physiomesh has a 5-layer design that is unique among hernia mesh repair products.  These characteristics were touted by Johnson & Johnson’s Ethicon division as superior and capable of preventing infectious inflammation and post-laparoscopic adhesion growth.

The complaint states that the marketing arm of the company also claimed that the 5-layer design of Physiomesh encouraged the body to absorb it as part of its own tissue, when according to Mary the opposite was true. Hernia mesh failure with this product was precipitated by the body’s attempt to attack it as a foreign object.

Physiomesh and its List of Problems

In addition to the human anatomy reacting to the Physiomesh product as foreign object, a common problem alleged in the material facts of this case is that the 5-layer design does not allow for intercellular fluid absorption. This can lead to a semi-permanent seroma or fluid sac in the area around the hernia mesh repair product.

This hernia mesh lawsuit also notes that the coatings of the 5-layer Physiomesh design can provide a surface that encourages bacteria growth leading to serious infection and anatomical rejection.

Mary accuses the defendants of knowing about the inherent dangers of the product during its marketing, distribution, and sales phases. She has requested a jury trial.