A plaintiff filed a new lawsuit in California on Sept. 4, 2018 alleging he suffered extreme complications following an umbilical hernia repair.

Plaintiff Jose H., a resident of Ontario, Calif., is suing CR Bard Inc., Davol Inc., and unnamed defendants believed to be co-conspirators in marketing, distributing, and implanting an unsafe umbilical hernia repair patch known as Ventralex.

The Plaintiff’s Story

According to the lawsuit narrative, Jose received a severe injury to his abdomen on Aug. 10, 2016. At the time of the injury, he was working in the town of Ontario at the Inland Powder Coating Corp. He says he was treated at Chino Valley Medical Center and diagnosed with an incarcerated hernia requiring umbilical hernia repair.

Jose had his open umbilical hernia repair surgery at that facility where a Ventralex patch measuring 4.3 cm was used to treat the injury. He says he was discharged from the medical center on Aug.15, five days after the event.

Unfortunately, he says he experienced severe complications following the umbilical hernia repair requiring additional medical intervention.

The complainant believes that the Ventralex patch is defective and, because of this, he developed a post-surgical obstruction of his bowel, an infection, and an open, draining fistulous wound in the region of the umbilical hernia repair.

Jose says he required exploratory laparotomy to determine his health status and then a small bowel resection. At a later date, it is anticipated that he will have to have the Ventralex umbilical hernia repair patch removed in a separate surgery.

Nature of the Ventralex Patch

The complainant alleges that the makeup of the Ventralex patch, including resin-based polypropylene, sets off dangerous chemical reactions in the body leading to the type of infectious, bleeding, and discharging wound which he incurred. These reactions also lead the multi-layer mesh to eventually disintegrate, according to the Ventralex lawsuit.

In fact, thousands of lawsuits have been filed alleging defective hernia mesh has caused serious complications for patients.

Workers’ Compensation for Hernia Injuries

Jose’s Ventralex claim raises issues related to workers’ compensation, since the implantation of the Ventralex patch was because of a work injury. The work injury resulted in a claim against the employers workers’ compensation insurance.

Costs to the employer because of the complications were unnecessarily inflated due to the allegedly defective nature of the patch, alleges the lawsuit. The additional costs allegedly include additional treatment, anticipated future care, extended temporary disability, permanent disability payments to Jose.

Under workers’ compensation law, the complainant in this case cannot sue his employer, having relied upon the benefits provided to receive care in total. Despite this, both the employee and employer can sue a third-party to recover expenses and the employer can claim recovery of costs of injury.

Jose is bringing the following causes of action against the defendants believing that they knew of the product’s limitations and risks in advance of marketing: Strict Product Liability—Manufacturing Defect, Strict Products Liability—Failure to Warn, and Negligence.The plaintiff is asking for general and economic damages in an amount to be determined according to proof at trial.

This is not the first Ventralex lawsuit. CR Bard has been hit with a number of other lawsuits alleging patients suffered severe complications after being implanted with the hernia mesh.

The CR Bard Lawsuit is Case No. 2:18-cv-07694 in the Superior Court of California, County of San Bernardino, Civil Division.