OR WAIT null SECS
The physician argued that the migration of the mesh is a known risk of the procedure and the patient had given informed consent for the operation.
Dawn Collins, JDA New York woman in her mid-40s suffered from stress urinary incontinence. She underwent a bladder sling repair and hysterectomy performed by a urogynecologist. She subsequently sued the physician, claiming the repair was negligently performed and the hysterectomy was unnecessary. She alleged that the tape used during the bladder repair was a mesh-type material and it migrated and protruded through the vaginal wall, causing permanent injury. She claimed this would cause her to suffer extensive permanent pain and require regular, very embarrassing physical therapy.
Also by Dawn Collins, JD: Damage from ureteral stent results in $8.5 million verdict
The physician argued that the migration of the mesh is a known risk of this procedure and the patient had given informed consent for the operation. The jury awarded the woman $500,000 for past pain and suffering, $350,000 for past lost income, and $3 million for future pain and suffering over 30 years, for a total award of $3.85 million.
A 64-year-old California woman underwent an operation to repair urethral hypermobility, during which a mid-urethral mesh sling was placed.
Following the operation, the patient began complaining of vaginal pain, frequent urinary tract infections, dyspareunia, pelvic and hip pain, and a return of urinary incontinence.
The woman sued the urologist and asserted that there was a lack of informed consent by the physician. She contended the surgeon failed to disclose his personal financial relationship with the mesh manufacturer.
The urologist argued that several treatments options were given to the patient and that she ultimately chose the surgical mesh implant. A defense verdict was returned.