A New York man filed a wrongful death claim against several power morcellator makers, alleging that their device caused his wife’s death.

Plaintiff Israel A. is bringing this power morcellator cancer lawsuit on behalf of the estate of his late wife Esther. Israel alleges that Esther underwent a laparoscopic morcellator hysterectomy in June 2011. He says that in the course of this surgery, Esther’s surgeon used a laparoscopic power morcellator to remove tissue.

Testing from before the surgery had allegedly shown only that Esther had an enlarged uterus due to uterine fibroids. The test had not detected any evidence of metastatic leiomyosarcoma or other uterine cancer, Israel says. He also says that Esther had not been warned of the risk of power morcellator cancer before she underwent surgery.

Later, in March 2014, Esther went to her doctor complaining of abdominal pain that had lasted for five days. Testing then revealed new soft tissue masses in her abdomen and cysts on her ovaries. After undergoing surgery to remove the tumors, she was diagnosed with metastatic high-grade leiomyosarcoma.

Israel says the doctors treating Esther’s cancer reviewed the pathology results from prior to her morcelator hysterectomy. They then concluded that Esther had had an occult cancer when she underwent her hysterectomy, Israel says.

Esther’s cancer progressed despite several cycles of chemotherapy. She was discharged to home hospice in October 2015 and died two months later.

Israel now says the power morcellator used during Esther’s morcellator hysterectomy caused the upstaging of her cancer that eventually took her life. He names as defendants several different companies that manufacture power morcellators, including Ethicon Inc. and its parent company Johnson & Johnson, Vention Medical Inc., and Karl Storz Endoscopy-America Inc., together with their related companies.

A laparoscopic power morcellator is a surgical tool used to cut tissue into small pieces and remove it. By cutting up the tissue, the morcellator allows removal of large masses of tissue through smaller incisions. This allows women to undergo gynecological surgical procedures like hysterectomy with the benefits of laparoscopic techniques, as opposed to open abdominal surgery.

Power Morcellator Cancer

Israel takes issue with the risks of morcellator hysterectomy in the same way that many other plaintiffs have done in similar power morcellator cancer lawsuits. He notes that by shredding the tissue intended for removal, these devices can leave tiny fragments of tissue behind in the patient’s body.

Morcellation done in the presence of uterine fibroids runs the risk of scattering cancerous tissue that went undetected prior to surgery, Israel says. This action can allegedly spread the cancerous tissue and cause it to upstage, significantly worsening the patient’s prognosis. Israel argues that in Esther’s case, the use of a power morcellator upstaged her leiomyosarcoma into malignant cancer.

Israel is raising claims based on theories of negligence, defective design, failure to warn, and breach of warranty. He is bringing these claims as part of a survivorship action, on behalf of his late wife’s estate. He is also bringing claims for wrongful death and loss of consortium, both of which seek compensation for his own losses resulting from the death of his wife.

The Power Morcellator Cancer Lawsuit is Case No. 2:16-CV-00205 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota.