A man has filed a hernia mesh pain lawsuit against Johnson & Johnson, holding them responsible for his hernia mesh device complications.

Plaintiff William P. was implanted with a Physiomesh device manufactured by Johnson & Johnson in July 2014. He underwent this procedure to repair his incarcerated incisional hernia.

In June 2014, less than one year later, William was forced to undergo an additional surgery. This surgery attempted a laparoscopic repair of his recurrent incisional hernia. However, during this surgery, a 2 centimeter hole was discovered in the Physiomesh product that was implanted the previous year.

Because of this, another Physiomesh product was implanted to fix the hole and repair the hernia. But, as a result of this second surgery, William has experienced excessive hernia mesh pain. He claims that he cannot work and perform his daily duties and activities.

According to his hernia mesh pain lawsuit, William must receive additional surgeries to fix his hernia mesh pain and other complications.

Most hernias occur in or near the abdominal wall or near the groin when fatty tissue, organs or intestines push through weakened muscle or connective tissue. A ventral hernia occurs at the abdominal wall, an inguinal hernia at the inner groin, and a femoral hernia at the outer groin. Umbilical hernias occur near the navel and hiatal hernias at the diaphragm.

An incisional hernia occurs near the site of a surgical wound that has not healed completely. “Incarcerated” refers to a strangulation of the hernia itself by surrounding tissue.

Mesh implants have been developed to aid in the repair of hernias as hernias may return. The use of surgical mesh helps hernias to heal completely and avoid recurrence.

There are many types of surgical mesh products ranging from absorbable mesh to non-absorbable, completely synthetic products. Patches, plugs and sheets are also available for surgeons to use.

The use of hernia mesh products has been steadily on the rise for many years. Since the 1980s, surgeons were already using laparoscopic techniques to repair hernias with mesh. As early as the year 2000, mesh surgeries made up over 90% of hernia surgeries in the U.S.

However, there have been many severe complications connected with the use of hernia mesh.

Because surrounding tissue is supposed to grow around the mesh product, there is a high rate of infection and hernia mesh pain. Adhesions, or the sticking of the mesh to tissue and causing inflammation, are common.

It has been shown in studies consistently that while hernia recurrence is lessened with the use of hernia mesh, the rate of infection, adhesions and hernia mesh pain is increased. This leads one to wonder if the latter outweighs the former.

In 2016, a study published by JAMA Surgery found that hernia mesh patients had a lower rate of recurrence. But out of over 3,000 patients studied, over 1,000 needed additional surgery to repair problems associated with hernia mesh pain and inflammation. These complications include bowel obstruction, perforation and bleeding.

Against the hernia mesh manufacturer, William has brought forth claims of failure to warn, defective design, negligence, defective manufacturing, breach of express warranty, breach of implied warranty, negligent misrepresentation and fraud.

This Hernia Mesh Pain Lawsuit is Case No. 1:17-md-02782-RWS in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia, Macon Division.