Close Menu

Ethicon Sling and Pelvic Mesh 

Update Fall 2023 – We are accepting Ethicon sling and pelvic mesh removal or revision cases.

Ethicon sling and pelvic mesh claims are filed for women injured by the implants. Since the pelvic mesh litigation began in 2011, we have successfully prosecuted cases for women implanted with TVT bladder slings and transvaginal mesh products that are found to be defective and cause serious complications. The symptoms associated with complications include:

  • Vaginal mesh erosion: polypropylene mesh can break down, leaving the mesh exposed to protrude through the vagina.
  • Erosion of mesh into other organs: polypropylene mesh may erode into the urethra, bladder or rectum.
  • Vaginal mesh contraction: polypropylene mesh shortens and tightens to cause vaginal tissue pain.
  • Pain during sexual intercourse
  • Urinary problems
  • Infections
  • Bleeding
  • Reoccurrence
  • Emotional issues
  • Chronic pain
  • Fistulas
  • Organ perforation
  • Incontinence
  • Pelvic nerve damage

Pelvic mesh and bladder sling problems have been reported by major medical clinics for decades. Major medical clinics and university affiliated medical institutions, including the Cleveland Clinic, have published articles and treatise for your review on Mesh Problems and Complications.

Ethicon Mesh Products

We are accepting certain cases involving Ethicon products that required surgical revision or removal including:

  • Prolift
  • Prolift +M
  • Gynemesh/Gynemesh PS
  • Prosima
  • TVT – Gynecare
  • TVT-Obturator (TVT-O)
  • TVT-Secur (TVT-S)
  • TVT-Exact
  • TVT-Abbrevo

Free Medical Legal Consultation

Call us for your free medical legal consultation at 1-800-814-4540 or fill out the Contact Us Form and tell us about your claim. There are state statutes that limit the time you can file a claim and medical records are destroyed after a time, so contact us now.

Pelvic Mesh Verdicts

Ethicon verdicts, settlements, manufacturers, products, and jurisdictions follow. Note that verdicts are often remanded, reduced or reversed after the trial leaving the claimant with much less than the verdict awarded.

  1. 7/12: $5.5 million – Christine Scott – C.R. Bard Avaulta Plus – CA
  2. 2/13: $11.11 million – Linda Gross – Ethicon/JJ Prolift – NJ
  3. 8/13: $2 million – Donna Cisson – C.R. Bard Avaulta – MDL WV
  4. 2/14: $0 – Carolyn Lewis – Ethicon/JJ TVT-O – MDL WV
  5. 4/14: $1.2 million – Linda Batiste – Ethicon/JJ TVT-O – TX
  6. 7/14: $0 – Diane Albright – Boston Scientific Pinnacle – MA
  7. 8/14: $0 – Maria Cardenas – Boston Scientific Obtryx – MA
  8. 9/14: $3.27 million – Jo Huskey – Ethicon/JJ TVT-O – MDL WV
  9. 9/14: $73.465 million – Martha Salazar – Boston Scientific Obtryx – TX
  10. 11/14: $6.7+ million – Amal Eghnayem – Boston Scientific Pinnacle – MDL FL
  11. 11/14: $6.7+ million – Margarita Dotres – Boston Scientific Pinnacle – MDL FL
  12. 11/14: $6.7+ million – Mania Nunez – Boston Scientific Pinnacle – MDL FL
  13. 11/14: $6.5+ million – Juana Betancourt – Boston Scientific Pinnacle – MDL FL
  14. 11/14: $5.25 million – Jeanie Blankenship – Boston Scientific Obtryx – MDL WV
  15. 11/14: $4.75 million – Chris Wilson – Boston Scientific Obtryx – MDL
  16. 11/14: $4.25 million – Carol Campbell – Boston Scientific Obtryx – MDL
  17. 11/14: $4.25 million – Jacquelyn Tyree – Boston Scientific Obtryx – MDL
  18. 2/15: Settled – Wise v. Bard in the MDL
  19. 3/15: Settled – Bellew v. Ethicon (Prolift) in the MDL;
  20. 5/15: Settled – Sanchez v. Boston Scientific (Pinnacle) – CA
  21. 3/15: $5.7 million – Coleen Perry – Ethicon/JJ Abbrevo sling – CA
  22. 5/15: $100 million – Deborah Barda v. Boston Scientific Pinnacle and Advantage Fit – DL
  23. 10/15: $0 – Carol Cavness v. Ethicon/JJ Prosima – TX
  24. 10/15: $0 – Martha Carlson v. Boston Scientific Uphold – NC
  25. 12/15: $12.5 million – Hammons v. Ethicon/JJ (Prolift) – PA
  26. 2/16: $0 – Sherrer v. Boston Scientific Solyx and Bard Align – MO
  27. 2/16: $13.5 – Carlino v. Ethicon/JJ (TVT) – PA
  28. 4/17: $20.0 million – Engleman v. Ethicon/JJ (TVT Secur) – PA
  29. 5/17: $2.16 million – Betz v. Ethicon/Prolift – PA
  30. 9/17: $57.1 million – Ebaugh v. Ethicon/JJ (TVT-Secur) – PA
  31. 3/18: $35 million – Kaiser v. Ethicon/JJ (Prolift) – IN
  32. 4/18: $68 million – McGinnis v. Bard – NJ
  33. 1/19: $41 million – Emmett v. Ethicon/JJ – PA
  34. 4/19: $120 million – McFarland v. Ethicon/JJ – PA
  35. 5/19: $80+ million – Mesigian v. Ethicon/JJ – PA
  36. 6/19: $500,000 – Dunfee v. Ethicon/JJ (Prolift) – PA
  37. 3/22: 0 – McBroom v. Ethicon/JJ (Prolift, TVT-Secur) – AZ
  38. 3/22: 0 – Shears v. Ethicon/JJ (TVT) – WV
  39. 4/22: $2.5 million – Redding v. Coloplast (Novasilk) – FL
  40. 7/22: 0 – Burris v. Ethicon/JJ (Prolift, TVT-Secur) – OH
  41. 10/22: 0 – Jarrett v. Ethicon/JJ (TVT-O) – AR
  42. 10/22: 0 – Richards v. Ethicon/JJ (TVT-O) – TX
  43. 12/22: 0 – Snowden v. Ethicon/JJ (Abbrevo) – TX
  44. 3/23: 0 – Benested v. Ethicon/JJ (2007 TVT-O, Prolift) – FL
  45. 5/23:   0 – Dandy v. Ethicon/JJ (TVT-O) – NJ

FDA Warnings

July 2011: An FDA Safety Communication identified concerns and issued new recommendations about the use of surgical mesh for transvaginal repair of Pelvic Organ Prolapse (POP).

September 2011: The FDA convened a public meeting of the Obstetrics and Gynecology Devices Panel to discuss the benefits and risks of the mesh use. The FDA issued 131 orders to conduct post market surveillance studies (PMAs) to 34 manufacturers of surgical mesh for transvaginal repair of POP. Most manufacturers elected to stop marketing surgical mesh.

January 2016: The FDA completed its reclassification of surgical mesh for transvaginal repair of POP into the highest risk class of devices (class III), which requires premarket approval (PMA) applications, the agency’s most stringent device review pathway, in order to stay on the market.

July 5, 2018:  Manufacturers that did not file PMAs for their POP mesh by this deadline had to withdraw their products from the market.

February 12, 2019: The FDA convened an advisory committee meeting to share the available evidence and seek expert opinions on how to evaluate the risks and benefits of these devices. Boston Scientific filed two PMAs for its devices, the Uphold LITE Vaginal Support System and the Xenform Soft Tissue Repair System. Coloplast filed a PMA for its device, Restorelle DirectFix Anterior.

In February 2019, the FDA convened a panel of experts and agreed with their recommendations, but the FDA decided not to approve Pelvic Organ Prolapse devices. Even though these products can no longer be used in patients, Boston Scientific and Coloplast are required to continue follow up of the subjects already enrolled in their 522 studies.

In 2019, some of the Ethicon mesh products had been removed from the market and were no longer being implanted in women. However, thousands of women have the Ethicon products – Exact TVT Sling, Secur Sling, Gynecare TVT, Abbrevo TVT Sling, Prosima, Prolift, Prolift+, and Prolift+ Fit – implanted and are still indwelling. Many ladies may experience complications and their surgeons may advise to have the implant surgically removed or revised.

Deadlines Approaching

Call for your free medical legal consultation at 1-800-814-4540 or email us at carolyn@carolynstclair.com or fill out the Contact Us Form and tell us about your claim. You don’t pay unless we win an award for you.

Share This Page:
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn