• The Mirena IUD is Manufactured by Bayer...
    ...the same company that has indicated to shareholders that it will reserve an additional $262.5 million to settle Yaz and Yasmin lawsuits over blood clots
  • Call the Mirena IUD Helpline and speak to a female medical social worker and a Mirena IUD lawyer
  • The Mirena IUD has had serious complications
    • Perforation of the uterus
    • The IUD can gravitate and become embedded in the uterus or abdomen
    • Pregnancy even with the Mirena inserted
    • Gravitation of the IUD, change in position
    • Ectopic pregnancy
    • Group A streptococcal sepsis
    • Infertility when the IUD becomes embedded
    • Need for surgical removal of the Mirena
  • The Mirena IUD is a flexible intrauterine device that is placed into the uterus through the vagina by a GYN. Mirena releases a continuous dose of hormones (levonorgestrel) to prevent pregnancy for up to five years.
  • Over 2 million women in the U.S. have used Mirena IUD for birth control.
    Mirena is one of the most common IUDs currently on the market.
  • Uterine Perforation Symptoms From the Mirena: If you have these symptoms see a physician immediately.
    • Lower abdominal pain
    • Heavy vaginal bleeding
    • Inability to locate the Mirena IUD string
    • Bloating, rigidity and pain in the abdomen
    • Nausea, Vomiting, Chills, Fever, Rapid heartbeat

Posts Tagged ‘Dayton’

Gynecare Power Morcellator Lawyers | Power Morcellator Helpline

Written by Mirena IUD Helpline on . Posted in Birth Control Central News, Mirena IUD Lawsuit News

Gynecare Power Morcellator Lawyers Filing Lawsuits

Johnson & Johnson’s Ethicon is facing  a product liability lawsuits filed by  women diagnosed with leimoyosarcoma following a laparoscopic hysterectomy.  New studies show that the company’s Gynecare power morcellators can cause  hidden uterine cancer to be spread throughout the body.

A complaint  was filed  indicating that a female  victim  now must take oral chemotherapy to keep leiomyosarcoma cancer  from spreading  by the hysterectomy power Morcellator  from killing her.

The manufacturer failed to adequately disclose the risk of cancer following laparoscopic hysterectomy morcellation, as the device may take hidden sarcomas contained within the uterus and chop up the tissue, causing a rapid dissemination of the aggressive cancer.

Power Morcellator Lawsuit Filed

During her hysterectomy in November 2008, Davis indicates that doctors used a Gynecare morcellator to cut up the uterus through a small incision in the abdomen. However, a biopsy of the removed tissue taken during the surgery was found to contain leiomyosarcoma cancer cells, which doctors were unable to discover or diagnose before the procedure.

As a result of the leiomyosarcoma diagnosis, Davis underwent multiple cycles of chemotherapy, but by April 11, three large masses were detected in her abdomen and pelvis, confirming that the cancer had spread. She underwent additional chemotherapy and now continues to take harsh oral chemotherapy drugs.

Morcellators have become  popular for use during hysterectomy and uterine fibroid removal surgicsl procedures.  It was discovered that the Morcellators have a high risk of spreading aggressive cancer cells that may be hidden within the uterus of some women, which doctors are unable to detect or diagnose before the surgery.

Davis’s complaint is one of a growing number of laparoscopic morcellator cancer lawsuits filed against Ethicon and other manufacturers of devices sold in recent years. Each of the cases raise similar allegations, indicating that manufacturers sold a defective and unreasonably dangerous medical device, failing to warn about the link between uterine fibroid surgery and cancer.

Power Morcellator MDL

All Ethicon  power morcellator lawsuits  have been consolidated  under  District Judge Kathryn H. Vratil in the District of Kansas.

If you Have been injured by a Power Morcellator contact our new Power Morcellator Cancer Helpline.

 

Surgical Devices Harmful To Women, Lawyers For Stryker Hip Replacement

Written by Mirena IUD Helpline on . Posted in Stryker Hip Recall

The FDA reports that these metal on metal and metal component hip implants  put women at a higher risk. Both the Stryker Rejuvinate and ABG II are  dangerous surgical implants that have a greater failure rate and complications for women.

Many articles and reports have been released that discuss hip replacements having a greater failure rate in women.

Hip replacements like Stryker Rejuvinate and ABG II are slightly more likely to fail in women than in men, according to research published Monday in JAMA Internal Medicine.  The research was financed by the Food and Drug Administration. Another report discusses hip resurfacing and states a drawback for women because of the bone weakening that accompanies menopause. Meanwhile, even advocates of resurfacing acknowledge that they have yet to agree on how best to screen women for the procedure.

“We were surprised by the results, as studies suggest that larger heads should have  lower wear and a lower risk of dislocation. However, we have seen an increase in revisions for pain and loosening, particularly in women,” says Alison Smith, a study author and statistician at the University of Bristol in the U.K. Depending on patient age and implant head size, the revision rate for all-metal hips is three to four times higher in women and two to three times higher in men compared with other implants.

The FDA Reports Women At a Higher Risk For Failure

The Food and Drug Administration, along with its safety communication, has included a list of risk factors that can increase a patient’s chances of suffering from metal on metal hip implant complications. Patients who are overweight, female, or physically active are more likely to suffer complications related to these hip replacement systems, and patients who have a sensitivity to certain metals, have kidney failure, have a suppressed immune system, or take corticosteroids are also more at risk.

It seems women are always the victims for these manufacturers that choose profits over warnings.

Hip Replacement Failure More Likely In Women, Study Says Studies on Google News Today

Hip replacements are more likely to fail in women than in men, but the overall risk of implant failure is low–according to a study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association, JAMA, and that was funded by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

Women account for the majority of the more than 400,000 patients who undergo either full or partial hip replacements in the U.S. each year.

“This is the first step in what has to be a much longer-term research strategy to figure out why women have worse experiences,” said Diana Zuckerman, president of the nonprofit National Research Center for Women & Families.

It appears the smaller frame and difference in the curve of the hip and pelvic region accounts for this. Anatomy appears to play a role.  Women tend to have smaller joints and bones than men, and so they tend to need smaller artificial hips. Devices with smaller femoral heads  the ball-shaped part of the ball-and-socket joint in an artificial hip are more likely to dislocate and require a surgical repair.

I wonder why there cannot be two types of replacements, one for women and one for men. But, since they are all being recalled it would just mean more injured women. I am sure there would be extensive marketing to hook women in explaining how their lives would remain active and have a better quality. If you or a wife, mother, girlfriend or female loved one has been injured by these hip implants contact us and we will direct you to a Stryker Hip Replacement lawyer.

Mirena IUD Hopes For A Mirena Lawsuit MDL, Mirena IUD Lawsuit MDL Update

Written by Mirena IUD Helpline on . Posted in Mirena IUD Lawsuit News

The Mirena IUD Helpline receives calls daily from women with complications from the Mirena IUD. The most serious complications are perforations of the uterus, abdomen or intestines. The Mirena IUD Helpline was hoping for a consolidation of all Mirena IUD lawsuits as this makes it easier for you, the Plaintiff to file, but the manufacturer is not so happy about it.

The complications lawsuits appear to be aimed at is something called science. If the Mirena was implanted with no complications and then years later moved, gravitated or migrated and became lodged, embedded or stuck in your uterus, abdomen or intestines that is easily provable as a fault of the product based on “science”. Science appears to be an easy a equal b concept. Other complications can not as easily be equated to the IUD based on the legal concept of “science”.

Read the latest Mirena IUD News Below

Mirena IUD Helpline Keeps you Updated

Although Bayer opposes the formation of a federal MDL for the Mirena lawsuits, the drug maker did file a request to consolidate the state court Mirena litigation pending in New Jersey. However, Bayer pointed out in their recent response that the circumstances in New Jersey were unique, as all of the cases were at an early stage, with no dispositive motions pending or trial dates scheduled.

Bayer Opposes Request to Consolidate Federal Lawsuits Over Mirena IUD

Posted: 08 Feb 2013 07:30 AM PST

In response to a motion to consolidate all federal Mirena IUD lawsuits, Bayer Healthcare has filed a response opposing the centralization of the cases as part of a multi-district litigation (MDL), arguing that it would prejudice their ability to defend the safety of the implantable birth control device.

Last month, a group of plaintiffs filed a motion to establish a Mirena MDL, which would transfer all product liability lawsuits filed against Bayer over their intra-uterine contraceptive device (IUD) to one U.S. District Judge for coordinated handling during pretrial proceedings.

At that time, eight different Mirena cases filed in the federal court system were identified, with each lawsuit pending before a different judge in eight different U.S. District Courts. In addition, product liability lawyers investigating Mirena lawsuits have suggested that hundreds, if not thousands, of complaints are likely to be filed in the near future.

In a response (PDF) filed with the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) on February 7, Bayer argued that centralization of the cases was not appropriate, and actually suggested that it would prejudice their defense by delaying the start of the first trial dates and encouraging the filing of “marginal” Mirena cases, which may require the drug maker to start negotiating Mirena settlements for business reasons, instead of legal reasons.

One of the cases identified for transfer was filed more than two years ago, and was set for trial to begin in May 2013. However, the case was stayed earlier this week pending a decision from the U.S. JPML about whether the Mirena litigation will be centralized.

Bayer argues that they would be faced with “starting over” with the MDL, which would duplicate discovery that has already been completed. The drug maker indicates that it has produced over 1.7 million pages of documents in the case and presented witnesses for depositions, suggesting that “it wants to vindicate its highly effective and currently marketed product as soon as possible.

Mirena IUD Lawsuits Involve Similar Allegations

Mirena is a T-shaped prescription intrauterine device (IUD), which is inserted into the uterus by a doctor to provide long-term birth control.

In recent weeks, a growing number of women throughout the United States have filed product liability lawsuits against Bayer alleging that they suffered severe injuries when their Mirena IUD perforated the uterus and “spontaneously” migrated following insertion.

The complaints involve common allegations that Bayer failed to adequately research the potential side effects of Mirena or warn about the risk of the IUD migrating long after it is implanted, increasing the risk of infection or serious damage to surrounding organs, often resulting in surgical removal of Mirena.

Bayer has argued that there are not sufficiently common issues of fact and law to require centralized management of the litigation, suggesting that the cases will be dominated by individual facts. The drug maker indicates that the Mirena warning label has provided information about the risk of perforation since it was introduced in 2001, so there is no need for extensive discovery about their knowledge about the risk of this complication from Mirena.

While the Mirena warning label does include information on the risk of perforation, plaintiffs argue that the language suggests that these problems only occur during insertion and that the drug maker failed to adequately warn about the risk of spontaneous migration, which may occur long after Mirena insertion. Many of the lawsuits allege that severe problems from Mirena could have been avoided if more detailed and accurate warnings had been provided.

Mirena MDL Hearing Likely in March

Consolidation of the Mirena litigation as part of an MDL, or multidistrict litigation, would result in all cases filed in U.S. District Courts throughout the country being assigned to one judge for coordinated handling in a manner similar to how a Mirena class action is managed during pretrial proceedings.

The process is designed to reduce duplicative discovery, eliminate conflicting pretrial rulings from different judges and to serve the convenience of the parties, witnesses and the courts. However, while the cases are centralized, each lawsuit remains and individual claim and if a settlement or other resolution is not reached following the MDL proceedings, each case would be remanded back to the U.S. District Court where it was originally filed for a separate trial date.

The Mirena IUD Helpline receives calls daily from women nationwide about Mirena IUD Lawsuits. “I want a Mirena IUD lawyer for a Mirena IUD lawsuit” is heard daily. Many of the complications are severe but, the ones lawyers are most interested in are Uterine and organ perforations as these are based on “science”. It appears in a lawsuit “science” means it is easy to prove. If the IUD was implanted correctly with no complications and years later migrates, moves or gravitates out of position and becomes lodged or embedded in the uterus, abdomen or intestines then it is rather straight forward. There is a long tern effect of infertility. Judges and the courts appear to look at these things in a very a equal b sort of way.

However in the hope to proceed for women injured mirena IUD lawyers were hoping to consolidate. That makes it easier for you, the plaintiff of course not enjoyed by the manufacturer that harmed you.

Ultimately, the New Jersey Supreme Court declined to centralize the Mirena cases as part of an MCL, or Multi-County Litigation. Although no details were provided by the New Jersey courts, centralized management may have been turned down because most of the New Jersey lawsuits over Mirena were already pending in one county.

It is expected that the U.S. JPML will schedule oral arguments over whether to establish a federal Mirena MDL at a hearing session scheduled to occur in San Diego, California on March 21, 2013.