The latest of group of pelvic mesh lawsuits filed against Johnson & Johnson continues to play out, with a number of patients alleging complications from defective pelvic mesh.

According to the claims, one of the most recent defective pelvic mesh claims comes from a woman alleging permanent urination problems. Many such vaginal mesh lawsuits are pending in Pennsylvania state court, with a jury hearing allegations of this defective pelvic mesh product severely damaging a woman’s urethra and causing her incontinence.

Johnson & Johnson and subsidiary Ethicon Inc. had faced these allegations in Philadelphia County, with one woman claiming the defective pelvic mesh eroded through her urethra and required three surgeries to fix.

Plaintiff Ella E. further states that her complications were directly caused by the defective pelvic mesh products, and has sustained permanent injuries. Ethicon Inc. comes in to this case after being hit with nearly $50 million in damage awards in previous cases.

Overview of Pelvic Mesh Lawsuit

According to the pelvic mesh lawsuit, Ella had the TVT-Secur mesh product implanted in May 2007 to treat her stress urinary incontinence (SUI). However, she had to have a second pelvic mesh product implanted after her condition did not improve.

The mesh erosion was reportedly discovered by her doctor in 2011, when Ella reported suffering from sudden urination urges and severe pelvic pain. These pelvic mesh complications had forced Ella to undergo multiple revision surgeries, with her pelvic mesh lawsuit claiming she was cut open from “hip to hip” to remove all possible mesh.

Even with these surgeons, Ella says, her urethra was left wide open and has left the control of urination impossible. Ella’s lawyers state she had used the product for its intended purpose and did not deviate from surgical instructions, and still suffered these effects of the allegedly defective pelvic mesh.

Pelvic mesh has been used for decades to treat women suffering from pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and stress urinary incontinence. These condition are often caused by traumatic event to the pelvic region like childbirth, from which the body was unable to recover.

The pelvic mesh is meant to act as a hammock for the pelvic organs, to keep them in place. However numerous women have alleged pelvic mesh complications, including but not limited to:

• Painful Intercourse
• Urination Problems
• Pelvic Organ Prolapse
• Vaginal Scarring
• Perforated Bladder, Bowel, or Blood Vessels
• Mesh Erosion in Vagina
• Infection
• Internal Organ Damage

Ella’s lawyers state Ethicon Inc. had known the potential risks associated with defective pelvic mesh, yet neglected to disclose this information on the product.

Ethicon lawyers argue that even though mesh erosion is considered a risk, it does not make the product defective. In addition, Ethicon argued Ella’s medical records showed that doctors discussed the risk of mesh erosion.

During this time, Ella had consented to have the device implanted in the hopes of treating her SUI. Instead, she claims, she had her medical condition compounded and will have to contend with uncontrollable urination for the rest of her life.

This Pelvic Mesh Lawsuit is Case No. 130700866, in the Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County, Pennsylvania.