In the past year, the concern over power morcellators causing uterine cancer in women continues to grow as the number of injury reports rises. Less than a month ago, the FDA issued a warning about using these devices in gynecological surgery due to the fact that they can rupture undetected cancerous tumors, inadvertently causing uterine cancer to spread in patients.

One particular form of uterine cancer associated with power morcellators is uterine sarcoma, in which a cancerous tumor lies in the woman’s uterine fibroid.

Power morcellators work by creating a precise incision in the abdomen. The device then cuts up the fibroid into minute sections and removes them through a tube. Oftentimes doctors are unaware that a uterine fibroid is cancerous until it is ruptured by the morcellator and the cancer is spread throughout the body.

This complication has led to a mass litigation movement against various manufacturing companies for failing to warn patients about the risk of uterine sarcoma. [Learn More.]

During the past year, two dozen women who had already been diagnosed with uterine cancer and had undergone a robotic hysterectomy using a power morcellator reported that their conditions worsened. Their uterine cancer had been initially treatable, but had evolved into a life-threatening disease after it was spread by the device.

Overview of Power Morcellator Opposition

Once uterine sarcoma is released, the cancer spreads and develops much quicker than normally and often leads to shortened life expectancy. Due to this severe risk, some medical experts believe women and their physicians should not use power morcellators. As a result, popularity for these devices has fallen dramatically, with Johnson & Johnson pulling many of their powered morcellators from the market in April 2014.

Many hospitals have also stopped using this device entirely, for fear of potential medical malpractice backlash. Despite these concerns, the FDA has not taken an official stance on power morcellators by removing them from the market.

One doctor leading the opposition against power morcellators is Dr. Hooman N., who sued Johnson & Johnson after his wife developed stage 4 cancer following a routine robotic hysterectomy procedure.

Dr. Hooman has since repeatedly asked the FDA to ban power morcellators from the market, and states that the current warning label is not sufficient enough to protect patients. Dr. Hooman ultimately argues that as long as these devices are on the market, women could be in danger.

Support for Power Morcellators

Medical experts who support power morcellators argue that these devices could be used on younger women who are at a lower risk for uterine cancer. However, the scar tissue left behind from the surgery may reduce their chances of becoming pregnant. Typically, women who undergo power morcellator surgery can be immediately identified as uterine cancer victims because the removed uterine tissue can be tested.

Despite the criticism, the FDA has not agreed to ban the devices because many believe power morcellators have a legitimate role in gynecological surgery.

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists praised this decision, because many women prefer robotic surgery over traditional surgery. Traditional surgery is more invasive and requires longer hospital recovery time for patients, making power morecalltors a convenient alternative.

Instead of banning power morcellators, the FDA is discussing different methods of informing women about the potential risks involved with these types of robotic surgeries. This includes producing adequate training for surgeons, providing more specific warnings, and possibly implementing additional precautions.

Power Morecellator Lawsuits

Dozens of lawsuits have been filed by women who were diagnosed with cancer following a robotic gynecological surgery. These power morcellator lawsuits are seeking compensation for medical expenses, pain and suffering and other damages related to the companies’ alleged negligence in putting the devices on the market without proper warnings.