The eighth vaginal mesh lawsuit to come to trial in Philadelphia recently ended in a verdict favoring the plaintiffs.

A jury ordered defendant Ethicon (a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson) to pay $41 million to plaintiff Suzanne E. and her husband Michael, who claimed that the former had suffered serious and debilitating injuries as a result of the company’s product. The award includes $25 million in punitive damages.

The Plaintiff’s Allegations

According to her counsel, Suzanne was implanted with with three different vaginal mesh devices in May 2007, in order to treat stress urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse. These devices included the Prolift, which was pulled off the market in 2012, the polypropylene Gynemesh, and the TVT-O, a product that is still manufactured and sold.

The plaintiff alleged she began to suffer complications within weeks of her initial surgery, as one of the meshes began to erode into the tissues of her vagina. This happened again two years later, she claims, and surgeons used chemical cauterization in an attempt to form scar tissue over the exposed mesh. Over the next six years, Suzanne says she experienced 14 erosions, requiring nine surgical procedures.

The Defendant’s Rebuttal

Lawyers for the defense argued that the vaginal mesh products in question had done the job for which they had been designed in treating her conditions. They also claimed that the plaintiff’s physicians had been aware of the risks at the time they performed her surgery.

Finally, they claimed that Suzanne had waited too long to file her complaint, which was originally done in July, 2013. Ethicon’s counsel argued that she should have known of the defects by 2009, since many of her erosion episodes occurred within two years of the original surgery.

In the end, however, the jury sided with the plaintiff, agreeing that the products had not been adequately tested before they were brought to market. The jury also agreed that the normal two-year statute of limitations dated from 2012, when Suzanne first learned that the devices were causing injuries.

The Problems With Vaginal Mesh Devices

Aside from the issue of testing (largely the result of a loophole known as 510(k) Premarket Notification), the plaintiffs claimed the proximate cause of the defendant’s injuries were design defects. The primary issue was the tight weave of the mesh, which allegedly made it impossible for them to integrate with the patient’s tissues as the manufacturer claimed. Instead, the plaintiffs claim tissue was forced to grow around it, causing a buildup of scar tissue. When this occurs, pelvic organs lose their flexibility and are unable to move – thus compromising their function.

What is Next for Ethicon?

Since the present litigation over Ethicon’s vaginal mesh products began in 2015, juries have found in favor of plaintiffs in 75 percent of the cases that have come to trial. To date, Ethicon has been ordered to pay out over $145 million to injured plaintiffs. However, there is as of yet no indication that Ethicon has any plans to settle any or all of the remaining lawsuits pending against it.

Suzanne and Michael E.’s Vaginal Mesh Lawsuit is Case No. 130701495, Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County.