A woman has filed a Ventrio hernia patch lawsuit after she allegedly experienced painful complications.

Plaintiff Nora P. says she underwent a ventral abdominal hernia repair in September 2015. At the time, a Ventrio patch was implanted to assist in the repair.

The Ventrio hernia patch is made by defendant Davol Inc., a subsidiary of defendant C.R. Bard Inc.

The Ventrio hernia patch lawsuit describes the product at issue as “an absorbable polydioxanone (PDO) recoil ring concealed between two layers of polypropylene mesh, and an expanded polytetrafluoroethylene (ePTFE) sheet, which is attached to one side of the polypropylene mesh.”

Nora alleges that in January 2016, she began experiencing severe abdominal pain that required she undergo surgery to remove the Ventrio mesh patch. The surgery purportedly included the removal of adhesions that had formed along both sides of the mesh. She says she continues to suffer complications related the mesh and may need further surgical intervention.

Ventrio Hernia Patch Lawsuit Allegations

According to the Ventrio hernia patch lawsuit, the polypropylene side of the patch was supposed to allow anchoring of the mesh to the abdominal wall through the production of scar tissue. The ePTFE side of the patch allegedly was intended to stop the formation of adhesions where the polypropylene would be exposed to internal organs.

The Ventrio hernia patch lawsuit alleges the ePTFE makes the patch more prone to infection and the polypropylene makes the patch extremely difficult to remove once the Ventrio hernia patch mesh becomes infected.

The Ventrio hernia patch lawsuit further alleges that Davol and C.R. Bard used “substandard and adulterated polypropylene and raw materials” to make the mesh — a deviation from the company’s own material and supply specifications. As a result, patients who received the Ventrio hernia patch allegedly were at “an unreasonable risk of severe adverse reactions to the mesh” or its materials, including:

• Chronic infections
• Chronic pain
• Recurrence of hernia
• Foreign body response
• Rejection
• Infection
• Scarring
• Improper wound healing
• Excessive, chronic inflammation
• Allergic reaction
• Internal organ adhesions
• Erosion
• Abscess
• Nerve damage
• Cancer
• Tissue damage
• Tissue death

Nora’s Ventrio hernia patch lawsuit points to the impermeable ePTFE layer that allows fluid to collect. This can cause the fluid to fester and become infected.

The ePTFE’s smooth surface also allegedly provides “an ideal bacteria breeding ground in which the bacteria cannot be eliminated by the body’s immune response, thus allowing bacteria to lie dormant and infection to eventually proliferate.”

The Ventrio hernia patch lawsuit alleges the manufacturing and design defects of the product directly caused Nora to experience her injuries and necessitated the removal of the hernia mesh patch through a subsequent surgery.

If you or someone you love has experienced severe, painful side effects as a result of a defective hernia mesh implant, you could be eligible for compensation.

The Ventrio Hernia Patch Lawsuit is Case No. 2:18-cv-08026-MLCF-DEK in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana.