Transvaginal Mesh Litigation: 1st Of Its Kind Verdict Reached Today

Christine Scott, is a 53 year old Bakersfield, California woman; a former runner who had undergone a transvaginal mesh implant procedure as a means to treat her stress urinary incontinence in 2008.  After implantation, Scott’s overall wellbeing went downhill as the mesh eroded into her colon.  Yesterday, Monday July 23, 2012, Scott won her case against Bard, being awarded $5.5 million in the lawsuit she had filed against the company.  The jury found that the product stated to help correct urinary leakage had injured her. The Avaulta Plus Biosynthetic Support System, designed by Bard had left her with incontinence, in chronic pain, and unable to enjoy relations with her husband.  Along with these complications Scott faces many surgeries to correct the problems caused by the mesh. In an interview with KGET-TV 17, Scott had imparted that “I don’t know if I’ll have one or one hundred surgeries ahead.”

The Bard company, formerly known as C.R. Bard, has been indicted in a settlement regarding its transvaginal mesh device that many women who suffer stress urinary incontinence resort to implanting through their reproductive organs.  It is worth noting that this procedure has single-incision mini-slings implanted for women who opt for it.  Transvaginal mesh is also used for vaginal repair of a female patient’s pelvic organ prolapse.

According to the latest press wire by the FDA on May 17, 2012, the FDA had ordered manufacturers and producers of transvaginal mesh to conduct postmarket surveillance studies that had reached a cumulative total of 522.  As litigation against manufacturers of the device gains traction, many women are coming forward with their complaints regarding settling their grievances in the legal realm and people in the medical industry as well as the legal establishment are starting to take notice.

In Scott’s case, the jury had returned the verdict late Friday to Kern County Superior Court Judge William Palmer.  Another issue in the forefront was the fact that she could only urinate through a catheter for a period of 5 months.  Since then, she had to undergo 8 additional removal surgeries in vain as the mesh remains in her body.  According to many surgeons in the healthcare industry, the permanent implants cannot be safely removed.  Scott was awarded $5 million and her husband was given a sum of $500,000 for their loss of of intimacy.

This landmark victory is a major milestone and is truly the first of its kind in the US against manufacturers of transvaginal mesh products and devices.  Currently there are about 650 cases pending against Bard as well as thousands pending before 5 other mesh manufacturers that’s meant to be litigated and settled in multidistrict litigation.

What many people find unnerving concerning this trend is that transvaginal mesh is considered a Class II medical device and manufacturers of it aren’t required to conduct clinical trials for safety and efficacy before they’re even introduced into the market.  Hopefully, as many women come forward and will find that their situations are not at all exclusive, manufacturers of this inherently harmful product will be held liable for damages.  And seeing that Mrs. Scott’s case had set the precedent for this kind of litigation, the hope will be that no other individual will be left susceptible to this sort of malpractice from the manufacturers of transvaginal mesh.

If you or a loved one have experienced neglect and suffer from serious adverse side effects as a result of undergoing the transvaginal mesh procedure, please do not hesitate to contact someone who can help you.