A pelvic mesh lawsuit has been filed against Ethicon, joining the larger mass litigation over allegedly defective pelvic mesh.

According to the vaginal mesh lawsuit, plaintiff Becky T. of Minerva, Ohio, had a model TVT pelvic mesh implanted in her body during a surgical procedure at Alliance Community Hospital in Alliance, Ohio in 2005.

However, she allegedly suffered complications from the pelvic mesh, and holds Ethicon, a subsidiary of medical giant Johnson & Johnson, liable for her complications.

Becky T.’s pelvic mesh lawsuit is scant on details, because it incorporates the text of the master complaint form. This means that so many pelvic mesh lawsuits have been filed against Ethicon that the legal system has resorted to a process called a multidistrict litigation, or MDL.

In MDLs, similar cases are coordinated, making them function almost like a single class action transvaginal mesh lawsuit. One feature of MDLs is that it is easer to join them once they are underway with a short form compliant like this one, by incorporating the allegations made in the long form complaint.

In the long form complaint for transvaginal mesh lawsuits in the larger MDL, it is alleged that Ethicon first put their transvaginal mesh products on the market in 2002, with several models coming out later. To note, some of the models did not have FDA clearance.

Under the 510k program of the FDA, a medical device manufacturer may release a product that is “substantially similar” to existing medical tech without the normal testing. However, the transvaginal mesh lawsuit holds that this failure to test the medical implant thoroughly enough led to a defective, dangerous product hitting the market.

The transvaginal mesh lawsuit long form further alleges that Ethicon and the other defendants “…intentionally, recklessly and/or negligently concealed, suppressed, omitted, and misrepresented the risks, dangers, defects, and disadvantages of the Pelvic Mesh Products [another name for transvaginal mesh].”

The transvaginal mesh lawsuit holds that the design of transvaginal mesh is inherently defective, including materials known to react to the immune system, “causing adverse reactions and injuries,” and “biomechanical issues with the design of the mesh and underlying tissue that cause that tissue to degrade resulting in injury” and other alleged flaws.

The lawsuit also holds that Ethicon “consistently underreported and withheld information” about alleged transvaginal mesh complications.

Transvaginal mesh complications include the mesh damaging tissues by eroding them, as well as pelvic pain and tissue scaring. The long form of the transvaginal mesh lawsuit holds that Ethicon knew about these risks, but failed to warn the public, healthcare providers, and even the FDA of the alleged risks associated with transvaginal mesh.

Instead, the transvaginal mesh lawsuit further alleges, Ethicon continued to aggressively market the medical implant when safer alternatives existed. The transvaginal mesh lawsuit holds that Ethicon’s actions leave them liable for alleged transvaginal mesh complications.

The Transvaginal Mesh Lawsuit is Civil Action No. 4685, within the larger transvaginal mesh MDL, In Re: Ethicon Inc., Pelvic Repair Systems Product Liability Litigation, MDL No. 2327.