Hernia Mesh Lawsuit

Many patients have filed lawsuits claiming that their hernia mesh, a surgically implanted device designed to provide comfort and relief from pain, caused their pain to increase. Worse, some hernia meshes fused to patients so fully that multiple revision surgeries were required to amend the damage created by the device. Many mesh recalls have been attributed to faulty design. Mesh manufacturers are being accused of failing to inform patients of the risks associated with hernia mesh.

April 1, 2025

Experts estimate that hernia mesh settlements can range from $65,000-$80,000 on average, and some cases exceed $1 million. Settlement amounts are determined by the severity of injury, medical costs, and strength of the case, which reflects hernia litigation's complexity.

March 1, 2025

Hernia Mesh Settlement Announced That Could Resolve Thousands of Lawsuits

February 1, 2025

In 2024, BD agreed to resolve approximately 38,000 U.S. lawsuits related to its hernia repair mesh products.

• January 1, 2025 - Robotic surgery advancements for hernia repair.
• December 1, 2024 - Medtronic sued by Hexagon Health over hernia mesh patents.
• November 1, 2024 - Becton Dickinson agrees to settle most of its hernia mesh litigation.
• September 1, 2024 - Parastomal hernia repair: Helping patients return to their everyday activities
• August 1, 2024 - Lawsuits have been filed against various manufacturers. Recent court proceedings have seen some settlements, while others continue to be contested. The focus has been on the manufacturers' failure to warn about potential risks and the need for revision surgeries due to mesh failure​​.
• July 1, 2024 - Impact of different fibrin glue application methods on inguinal hernia mesh fixation capability.
• June 1, 2024 - Previous inguinal hernia surgery does not limit the likelihood of choosing prostatectomy as primary prostate cancer therapy.
• April 1, 2024 - Amyand’s Hernia: A Rare Case Study of Perforated Appendicitis in an Inguinal Hernia.
• March 1, 2024 - Victims of the Mesh and Sodium Valproate Scandal need to be compensated soon.
• February 1, 2024 - Switching from robotic-assisted extended transabdominal preperitoneal (eTAPP) to totally extraperitoneal (eTEP) hernia repair for umbilical and epigastric hernias.
• January 1, 2024 - J&J mesh settlement leads judge to dismiss 200 cases. In late November, the company and claimants filed a motion to dismiss cases relating to Ethicon's Physiomesh.

• Biggest Award: $184 million paid by C.R. Bard 
• Number of Cases: More than 17,000 claimants as of March 2020
• Introduction Date: First introduced in the 1950s, hernia mesh intended to be an innovative solution to hernia injuries.
• Intended Use: Permanent repair of a hernia, as surgical mesh creates a structure for tissue to combine with the mesh for strengthening.
• Side Effects: Complications from hernia mesh can include chronic infections, pain, bruising, bleeding, swelling and can also lead to the need for more repair surgeries.

Companies that have been involved in hernia mesh recalls in the past include:

• Ethicon, a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson: Ethicon recalled their Physiomesh Composite Flexible Mesh in May 2016 The recall was initiated because of higher than average rates of hernia revision surgery and recurrence.
• Atrium Medical Corporation: Atrium Medical Corporation recalled their C-QUR Mesh products in 2013 and 2015. The recalls were initiated due to concerns over potential contamination and sterility problems.
• Bard (now a part of Becton, Dickinson, and Company): Bard was sued in the mid-2000s for its Kugel Hernia Mesh. While not a traditional  recall, the company was sued over product concerns that led to revisions and removals.

To get the most accurate and current information about hernia mesh, it's important to keep up with the latest information, whether from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration or another regulatory agency in your country.

Hernia mesh manufacturers are companies or corporations that seek to mass-produce a hernia mesh product for sale and surgical implantation. These companies are often highly successful and appropriately compensated for the very necessary work of providing essential medical devices to patients. 

The major manufacturers that produce hernia mesh are:

• Atrium Medical
• C.R. Bard
• Ethicon
• Gore Medical
• LifeCell
• CorporationMedtronic

These manufacturers are the chief defendants in a hernia mesh lawsuit. Some of these manufacturers have had multiple products recalled. All of the defendants in the hernia mesh lawsuit have a duty of care to provide a safe, thoroughly vetted implant product. Hernia mesh manufacturers make highly specialized surgical devices. Meshes are often implanted in sensitive areas. Sometimes, the mesh is intended to stay with the patient for life. This requires a huge burden of trust that patients must invest in hernia mesh manufacturers. Several complications can occur after a hernia mesh surgery, and some injuries may be due to defects in the design of the mesh implant.

Ethicon Physiomesh

The manufacturer voluntarily recalled this hernia mesh implant. The recall was due to higher than expected rates of hernia recurrences and reoperations. The polypropylene mesh used in Physiomesh has been reported to cause adhesions and infections.

Atrium's CQUR Mesh

Some patients have reported complications, such as infection and adhesions, associated with C-QUR mesh. This mesh product has been the subject of legal action.

Bard/Davol’s Kugel Mesh

Due to problems with the “memory rewind ring, the Bard/Davol hernia mesh device has been the subject of recalls and other legal action.

There are many reasons hernia mesh lawsuits are complex and long-running. We are not dealing with a single manufacturer, nor a single product. Hernia surgery and hernia mesh production is a massive business in the United States, with hernia repair generating about $48 billion annually. Around 20 million hernia repairs are carried out on a yearly basis, and this number is set to increase given the rise of risk factors, such as obesity. This creates a situation where multiple companies are facing litigation, multiple products are being recalled, and thousands of plaintiffs are bringing lawsuits for a variety of injuries. 

As stated, the issue is complex. Below, we will run through the major hernia mesh companies, their product recalls and lawsuits they face:

If the surgical mesh used for your hernia repair was subjected to recall by FDA or market withdrawal, and you suffered documented problems or complications such as hernia growth, pain, infection, fistulas, bulging, bowel obstructions, or the surgical removal of your hernia mesh device due to defect, . you may be qualified for the hernia mesh lawsuit.

C.R. Bard, Inc., is notable for paying out the biggest hernia mesh settlement to date - $164 million. However, the company is not out of the woods yet, as Bard is facing thousands of lawsuits in a multidistrict litigation (MDL) in Ohio. As of 2022, six different Bard Kugel hernia mesh products have been recalled. The company also produces Vetralex Patch hernia mesh through its subsidiary, Davol Inc. Ventralex has yet to be recalled by the FDA, but legal proceedings against Davol have begun in Rhode Island. It seems likely that the Ventralex hernia mesh lawsuit settlements will be just as expensive for Bard as the other cases it faces.

Ethicon, Inc., is a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson. Ethicon has specialized in wound closure and surgical sutures since the 19th century. Today, however, it faces an MDL in Georgia with over 2,000 plaintiffs accusing the company of providing defective hernia mesh products, and for failing to warn doctors of potential complications. 

The case was filed in Georgia by Wright and Schulte, LLC, acting on behalf of individuals against Ethicon. The Wright and Schulte hernia lawsuit is not limited to Ethicon/J&J, however, as Richard Schulte was also named in the Plaintiffs Steering committee in a case against Atrium Medical Corp. Wright and Schulte is also reviewing cases against Bard and Covidien Pariterex (Medtronic).

As of 2020, four J&J/Ethicon hernia mesh products have been recalled. The recalls are from three distinct product lines – Physiomesh, Proceed, and Prolene. We were informed that the MDL 2846 Bellwether trial based in the Southern District of Georgia is planning a bellwether trial for Ethicon hernia mesh cases, possibly as early as January 2021. A bellwether trial is an important indicator for mass tort cases, and it could provide us with some insight into future Johnson and Johnson hernia mesh lawsuit settlements.

Mass hernia mesh recall dates back to the mid-2000s, but it seems that problems still remain. There is speculation that hernia mesh surgery could one day be banned by the FDA; much like the ban on pelvic mesh produced for transvaginal repair. 

There has been criticism of how products are tested, and some criticism of hernia mesh recalls – FDA standards and procedures. For example, new hernia mesh products are approved by the FDA under a process known as 510(k). To gain approval, manufacturers must show that the new product is fundamentally similar – “substantial equivalence” – to one already approved by the FDA. While that makes sense from a safety perspective, A study on these regulations showed that manufacturers demonstrated “substantial equivalence” with products on the hernia mesh recall list.

Hernia mesh implants are often lumped into one group. While it is true that hernia meshes all work to accomplish the same goal, it would be incorrect to state that all types of hernia mesh are the same. Some of the most common types of hernia meshes that are cited in a hernia mesh lawsuit include:

• Abdominal meshes(implanted in the abdomen)
• Ventral hernia mesh(treats hernias in the abdominal wall musculature)
• Hiatal hernia mesh (treats stomach hernias) Inguinal hernia mesh (treats intestinal protrusions near the groin or lower abdomen)

• Even after making these distinctions, the material of the hernia mesh can change a patient’s chance of experiencing complications. Typically patients will have one of two options for mesh materials: natural or synthetic. The natural mesh is derived from animal tissue, usually from a cow or pig. Often this type of mesh has fewer complications. Natural meshes are not designed to be permanent, but rather act as a placeholder while the body repairs the hernia. 
• The downside to natural meshes, however, is that they will degrade and lose strength over time. As an alternative, synthetic meshes can be used. Synthetic meshes can be absorbent, behaving similarly to animal meshes, or non-absorbent, becoming a permanent fixture in the body. Synthetic, non-absorbent meshes are typically used to permanently reinforce an area of the body. These are often implanted via laparoscopic surgery. This combination can be the starting point for many of the side effects and complications that patients experience. 

Some of the side effects that may indicate a failure of the hernia mesh include:

• Pain
• Bruising
• Swelling
• Skin Rash
• Bleeding
• Chronic Infection
• Difficulty urinating

This list is not exhaustive. sMesh left in the body cannot lead to a variety of damaging complications. If these symptoms begin to appear, a medical professional should be consulted.

According to the FDA, the following hernia mesh complications have been reported:

• Adhesion of tissues
• Recurrence of the hernia
• Blockage of the intestines
• Internal bleeding
• The abnormal fusing of organs and intestines, known as a fistula
• Perforation of tissues and organs
• Mesh shrinkage, called contraction
• Seroma, or fluid build-up around the site

 Any health risk that abates after the removal of a hernia mesh can be attributed to the mesh’s presence. Unfortunately, some meshes may require multiple, painful revision surgeries.

These flawed devices have been on the receiving end of multiple manufacturers and FDA recalls.

After surgery of any kind, it can take years for problems to become apparent. This is often the case for hernia mesh surgery. However, those who have suffered complications have reported symptoms of torn hernia mesh. 

These are listed below:

• Bloatings and bowel obstruction
• Slow healing of the surgical wound
• Nausea and fever
• Chronic pain
• Bleeding 
• Erectile dysfunction. 
• Recurrence of original hernia problem.

Some hernia mesh devices have been labeled as so harmful that they require a total recall. When the FDA issues a recall on a product, they’ve deemed the product to be in violation of their rules and regulations for consumer safety. These products have been deemed by the FDA to be irreparably flawed.

It’s important to note that FDA recalls do not require the recalled product to be removed from hospitals. Instead, a recall requires the manufacturer to stop production of the product until the issue is fixed. This makes it important for hernia surgery patients to do their research and ask questions about the type of hernia mesh that will be used during their surgery.

The following hernia mesh devices have been recalled by the FDA in their entirety:

1. Bard Composix
2. Bard VentralightBard
3. Ventralex ST
4. Bard Davol
5. Covidien Parietene
6. Atrium CQUR
7. Ethicon Physiomesh
8. Ethicon J&J Proceed

Most recalls were due to a combination of a large number of adverse event reports and hernia mesh lawsuit findings. Through these combined methods, manufacturers were forced to accept responsibility for denying the complications of hernia mesh implants.

In most cases, after the FDA requires a manufacturer to initiate a total recall of a product line, substantially similar products undergo review. In this way, a hernia mesh lawsuit can not only compensate victims of undisclosed events, but also massively improve device safety for future patients.

Hernia repairs are one of the most common surgeries, with around 20 million performed each year globally. The majority of these surgeries require the implantation of hernia mesh, a medical procedure that dates back to the 19th century. 

Hernia mesh insertions became common in the United States in the 1950sThiscommon procedure should have been perfected over time. Unfortunately, in more recent times, it seems that companies producing hernia mesh products have not worked to improve hernia mesh products, leading to pain and suffering for thousands, if not millions, of patients. 

A more recent timeline for hernia mesh is shown below, which includes significant hernia mesh recall dates:

• 2000: Hernia mesh producers begin using synthetic and animal-derived hernia mesh products. 
• 2005: FDA issues a class 2 recall of certain polypropylene hernia mesh products manufactured by Ethicon. 
• 2005: C.R. Bard recalls Composix Kugel mesh products. 
• 2005-2007: First lawsuits are filed against C.R. Bard, which are later bundled into MDL. 
• 2010: Ethicon recalls Proceed surgical mesh. 
• 2011: C.R. Bard agrees to pay $184 million to settle approximately 2,600 Kugel hernia mesh lawsuits. 
• 2013: Atrium recalls C-QuR V-pack mesh. 
• 2016: Ethicon recalls Physiomesh Flexible Composite mesh. 
• 2018: Atrium recalls ProLite Mesh patches. 
• 2020: There are now three MDLs against hernia mesh companies, representing almost 15,000 plaintiffs. The MDL against Ethicon is being heard in a court in Georgia. and C.R. Bard will face action in Ohio, as will Atrium in New Hampshire. 
• 2020: Due to the coronavirus pandemic, several dates for bellwether trials for hernia mesh implants are delayed.
• September 2020: 48 states reach a settlement agreement with C.R. Bard for $60 million over misleading marketing claims of surgical mesh products. 
• October 2020: Judge Edmund J. Sargus of the Southern District of Ohio reschedules bellwether trial against C.R Bard for January 2021. More delays are plausible given the backlog of cases and logistical problems caused by Covid-19. 

The largest sum thus far from hernia mesh producers was the $184 million payout from C.R. Bard in 2011. It is difficult to say how much hernia mesh lawsuit settlements will be in the future. There is reason to believe that the final bill for companies like Johnson & Johnson and C.R. Bard could reach billions of dollars. Those same companies have had to pay huge amounts – the bill is now estimated at $8 billion – due to similar levels of damage caused by pelvic/vaginal mesh procedures.

A statute of limitations is a maximum time frame set out for legal proceedings to be initiated after the event in question has occurred. The length of a statute of limitations can vary from state to state, and  depends on the type of crime or civil case. 

Personal injury or product liability cases, such as the hernia mesh lawsuit, can be complicated, as damage can occur over time. Some states might time the statute of limitations from the date of surgery, whereas others implement a ‘discovery’ rule, meaning the statute of limitations begins after the problem is found – and that could be years after surgery. 

If you’ve suffered complications following a hernia mesh surgery, it’s important that you reach out to experienced hernia mesh lawyer who can help you decide on next steps for your potential case. he statute of limitations only applies to the initial filing of a lawsuit, and it cannot run out once your case has been filed. Even if you are unsure whether the statute of limitations has passed, speak to a hernia mesh legal expert to explore your options.

If you have been harmed by hernia mesh and have required a second surgery due to this harm, it is important that you find a lawyer who specializes in hernia mesh cases. A hernia mesh product liability lawyer will be able to review your case and tell you the best course of action moving forward. Select Justice can put you in touch with the right legal counsel for your needs.

After talking with a lawyer experienced in hernia mesh lawsuits, you can decide if legal action is the right choice for you. If you decide to take legal action, your lawyer will then file the lawsuit on your behalf.

There are no fees for starting the process and signing the contingency agreement. Fees will only be assessed in the event of a successful outcome from the lawsuit. 

It might be assumed, erroneously, that the hernia mesh case is a class-action lawsuit. It’s an easy mistake to make as thousands of cases are bundled together to litigate against a handful of hernia mesh companies. The hernia mesh lawsuits fall under the category of mass tort lawsuits. There are several differences between mass tort cases and class actions. 

Class-action lawsuits treat the litigation as a single case, regardless of how many plaintiffs take part. Conversely, each individual is treated separately in a mass tort case. Most mass tort cases are organized into MDLs (multidistrict litigations), enabling the legal process to run more efficiently. 

It can be difficult to estimate exactly how long lawsuits will last. A hernia mesh lawsuit may last for years before a company offers a settlement. If the case settles, the verdict may be appealed numerous times, adding additional months or years to the case.For this reason, many attorneys work on contingency. A contingency is a common practice in which an attorney will accept all of the fees, costs, and hours up front in exchange for a predetermined percentage of the verdict or settlement.

Under contingency, an attorney can continue to pursue justice for their clients without concerns of the client running out of funds.

Due to the ongoing litigation process, no recent settlement amounts are available to evaluate. After a series of complications with a previous mesh product, Bard is recorded as paying out $184 million across the early 2000s and 2010s.  With the large influx of plaintiffs who are seeking an attorney to file a hernia mesh lawsuit and the FDA concerns about long-term mesh safety, it is possible to speculate that MDLs this time around could foreseeably exceed these numbers.

In addition to a sharp influx of hernia mesh lawsuit filings, the FDA and other investigative bodies have been examining the damage caused by hernia mesh on a global scale.

In January 2020, the BBC Network investigated hernia meshes and found that many hernia mesh devices were approved without rigorous testing due to their similarity to existing products. This is similar to the U.S. FDA’s 510(k) pathway, which follows a similar process.

A study published in the ANZ Journal of Surgery in April 2020 has explored the safety of inguinal hernia mesh. In a study of l of 1711 hernia in 1366 patients that underwent hernia repair surgery between 2002 and 2016,  1047 of those repaired using laparoscopic surgery suffered the long-term effects of chronic pain.

The FDA has also become more aware of hernia mesh related complications, and has advised patients and medical workers on how to monitor repaired hernias for complications and damage. Additionally, the FDA has updated its informational mesh pages on hernia mesh recalls..