Couple Sues Ethicon Over Wife’s Transvaginal Mesh Failure

A couple from Pennsylvania are alleging in a new lawsuit that medical device manufacturer Ethicon Inc. negligently marketed a transvaginal mesh implant that injured the woman and caused significant problems in their marriage.

Due to the number of complaints like that of plaintiffs Francine Ruyak and her husband John Ruyak, multidistrict litigation has been set up in U.S. District Court in West Virginia and plaintiffs only need to file a simplified complaint that includes the name of the vaginal mesh implant that caused the injury and for which counts a woman or couple are seeking damages for. As a result, it is unclear what problems Ruyak faced after an Ethicon TVT was implanted.
Generally speaking, however, women who were being treated for stress urinary incontinence with these devices complain that the use of synthetic polypropylene led to allergic reactions. The inflammation that results can lead to bladder sling implant failure, infections and even organ perforation. Since the transvaginal mesh devices were designed to last longer than earlier options, they can also erode into the vagina over time.

Lawsuits like Ruyak’s also allege that the medical device makers that sold and marketed these products used an accelerated approval process by indicating that they were demonstrably similar to other stress urinary incontinence treatments. As a result, older vaginal mesh implant trials were used, although product liability lawyers now argue that they had markedly different effects in women.

There are now several thousand cases pending in U.S. District Court in West Virginia against transvaginal mesh companies, including Ethicon, Mentor and C.R. Bard among others. While there are small differences in design, there are common allegations of how bladder sling implant failure side effects caused by allegedly defective designs in the Ethicon TVT and other devices led to significant injuries for older women.

The case is Francine Ruyak et al. v. Ethicon, Inc. et al., Case No. 13-cv-26234, U.S. District Court, Southern District of West Virginia. Counts against the medical device maker include strict liability, fraud and loss of consortium among others.

Women who have dealt with problems as a result of these stress incontinence treatments may consider following the same path that so many others have. Learn more about legal options by visiting the Vaginal Mesh Sling Class Action Lawsuit Investigation. You can fill out the short form there for a free consultation with one of our partner bladder sling implant lawsuit lawyers to determine whether or not you are eligible to pursue damages from Ethicon, Mentor, C.R. Bard or whichever company manufactured the device causing your pain and suffering.