Many patients surgically implanted with Ethicon Physiomesh® Flexible Composite Mesh now need revision surgery for various severe health complications. High rates of hernia recurrence reported to the Food and Drug Administration triggered a voluntary global product withdrawal in 2016. Patients with the defective hernia mesh patches must now pay for additional surgery in hopes of correcting any issues. Since all hernia mesh injury lawsuits are relatively recent, no plaintiff has yet won a Physiomesh settlement. Some plaintiffs who developed life-threatening health complications say their Physiomesh injuries are due to defective hernia repair patches.

January 2018 Trial Date Set for First Plaintiff Demanding a Physiomesh Settlement

Just weeks before the Ethicon Physiomesh voluntary market withdrawal, Matthew Huff filed the first hernia patch lawsuit in April 2016. Huff was hospitalized in 2015 with abdominal pain, chills, fever, nausea and skin discoloration due to hernia mesh infection. Surgeons discovered severe, life-threatening Physiomesh complications, including two abdominal abscesses and an intestinal fistula. Despite having surgery to debride both abscesses, Huff allegedly still suffers from severe side effects – including two open abdominal wounds he must clean and pack daily. Huff accuses Johnson & Johson’s subsidiary company, Ethicon, of negligence for:

• • Sending Physiomesh to market without first reasonably testing it for safe use in patients
  • Failing to warn consumers and health professionals about the product’s risks
  • Marketing a defective device that was voluntarily withdrawn due to adverse event reports, which constitutes a breach of warranty

Huff’s case is now scheduled for trial before Senior U.S. District Judge J. Phil Gilbert in Illinois on January 22, 2018.

Florida Woman Demands Physiomesh Settlement Due to Bowel Obstruction, Adhesions

At least three more injured plaintiffs filed claims against Ethicon within the past year. No case has yet gone to trial nor won a Physiomesh settlement. Due to the similarity and severity of each plaintiff’s injuries coupled with Physiomesh’s voluntary market withdrawal in May 2016, more injured patients may still come forward.

Joanne Quinn had Physiomesh surgically implanted for hernia repair in May 2014. Just over a year later, Quinn had laparoscopic surgery to find the source of her steadily increasing abdominal pain. Quinn’s surgeon discovered extensive adhesions between the Physiomesh patch material and her own tissue. Unfortunately, her doctor was unable to surgically remove the entire Physiomesh patch and pieces of material still remain. Adhesions between Quinn’s bowel and abdominal wall remain stuck together with mesh fragments, causing diminished bowel motility and painful obstruction. In September 2016, Quinn sued Ethicon for ongoing pain and suffering due to her injuries.

Hernia Recurrence Cited In Two Additional Lawsuits Seeking A Physiomesh Settlement

A Boston plaintiff underwent three failed revision surgeries for hernia recurrences after having an Ethicon Physiomesh patch implanted in 2013. During a repair attempt in March 2016, doctors found adhesions linking small loops of David Watring’s bowel to his hernia. Despite repeated surgeries to fix the problem, Watring suffered another hernia recurrence within six months. Watring then sued Ethicon in November 2016 for negligence as well as breach of warranty.

Six weeks later, Sarah Ann Gilman‘s lawsuit filings demanded a jury trial. Gilman’s allegations echo those made by previous claimants asking for a Physiomesh settlement. Within six months of receiving a Physiomesh patch, Gilman needed revision surgery for hernia recurrence. Every year, surgeons perform about 100,000 to 15,000 ventral hernia repairs in the U.S. Due to Ethicon’s voluntary Physiomesh recall in May, many patients who need revision surgery may still file claims.