Open During Coronavirus Outbreak
Attorneys Available 24/7
NO RECOVERY, NO FEE
(855) 385-2529

FREE CONSULTATION

Hysterectomy Morcellation Class Action Lawsuit for Cancer Diagnosis

Hysterectomy Morcellation Class Action Lawsuit for Cancer Diagnosis The USFDA is warning women that the Morcellation system could result in the spreading of cancerous cells and tissue to other regions of the body thus resulting in a increased risk of cancer. Our defective medical and surgical device law firm is currently investigating the filing of class action and or single party lawsuits against the manufacturers of morcellation devices used in hysterectomies across the country.

FDA Warning on the Use of Morcellator Device Due to Cancer Risk

On April 17th 2014 the Food and Drug Administration issued an advisory warning against the use of Morcellator surgical devices in hysterectomy operations. According to the warning letter the use of the surgical device has been linked to a heightened risk of the development of cancer amongst women undergoing the procedure. The medical device safety communication states, “If laparoscopic power morcellation is performed in women with unsuspected uterine sarcoma, there is a risk that the procedure will spread the cancerous tissue within the abdomen and pelvis, significantly worsening the patient’s likelihood of long-term survival.” Generally hysterectomies are preformed to eliminate symptoms associated with fibrosis a condition that can result in severe cases of pain, discomfort, bladder and bowl irregularities and chronic vaginal bleeding. The morcelattion system was developed to be a less invasive way of removing post surgical flesh from a patient uterine system via the vaginal canal. Additionally the morcellator system was to result in faster recovery time for patients. Specific Make and Models of Laproscopic Morcellation Devices Posing a Threat to Patients: A list of specific morcellation devices believed to pose a threat of exposing women to an increased risk of post surgical-hysterectomy cancer are provided below..
  • FemRx: Diva Morcellator
  • Lumenis Incorporated: VersaCut Morcellator
  • Ethicon Gynecare: X-Tract System, Morcellex Tissue, Morcellator Morcellex Sigma
  • Hologic: MyoSure
  • Nouvag: Morcellator TCM3000BL
  • Interlace Medical: Hysteroscopic Morcellator
  • Smith & Nephew: Trueclear Hysteroscopic Morcellator
  • Olympus: Gyrus PKS PlasmaSORD
  • Blue Endo – MOREsolution Tissue Morcellator
  • LiNA Medical – Xcise Cordless Laparoscopic Morcellator
  • Karl Storz – Rotocut G1, G2, Steiner, and Sawalhell Supercut Morcellator
  • Morce-Power:  2306 Electronic Morcellator

Filing a Defective or Unsafe Medical Device Lawsuit – And Class Action Claim

Generally, there are three ways to prove the existence of a defect in a medical device. (1) Defect in the original design of the product. (2) Defect in the manufacturing process of the device. (3) Defect in the labeling – also known as the failure to properly warn of all known and or knowable defects associated with the use of the medical device. According to the FDA morcellation devices are used in tens of thousands of procedures every year prompting calls for the implementation of a class action – mass tort lawsuit. However in some instances single party claims are more beneficial to victims then mass tort class action lawsuits. This is because in class action lawsuits every individual member has a right to an equal portion of the settlement amount provided regardless of the severity of magnitude of the ham suffered. Thus victims who are more severely harmed will not be able to receive the full and just compensation they would have attained vial the filing of a single party defective product claim.

Attorney Consultation for Morcellation Cancer Lawsuits – Cost of Legal Representation

All confidential legal consultations are conducted by our attorneys free of charge for any harmed individual who contacts our law offices. In many instances victims of harmful medical devices maybe hesitant to seek out legal representation for fear of costs associated with pursuing legal actions against at fault and liable parties. In response our legal system allows for legal representation on a contingency fee basis. This means that any legal fee or cost associated with representation will only be taken out of a financially successful settlement or jury verdict. There are no upfront or out of pocket legal fees associated to any legal work that is completed. No Win Zero Fee Guarantee – If there is no successful settlement or jury verdict you will not have to pay us anything. Contact Us: If you have any further questions feel free to contact our attorneys by calling (855)385-2529. Further Information: Laparoscopic Device Surgery Injury Attorney Statute of Limitations for Filing a Defective Product Lawsuit    

COMMENTS (2)
Reply

I have been suffering from Power Morcellators side effects as i have had fibroid surgery. Now i am looking forward to consult an attorney so that they can take action against the hospital and the Power Morcellators manufacturer. I have consulted with a morcellator attorney. Can you help me regarding my problem?

Reply

Hello,
My mom died from a uterine cancer in November of 2015. She had a “hysteroscopy and fractional D&C” on February 5, 2015 because of “Post-menopausal bleeding with suspicion for endometrial cancer.” This procedure was performed with a Myosure morcellator built by Hologic. I found this out on January 14th 2019 after asking for her medical record because she has several female grandkids that I felt might possibly benefit from that information.
This surgery was performed in Pullman, Washington and it revealed a carcinosarcoma. Then on March 4, 2015 she underwent a robotic hysterectomy and lymphadenectomy. By this time, half of the excised lymph nodes were metastatic. This information is in her medical records (which also mention mullerian tumor and leiomyoma).
After this 2nd procedure, the Dr. told her that she would most likely die in a few months even if she agreed to conventional treatment for this very aggressive disease. She chose to live her remaining time without treatment and then did great until October 2015 when she was admitted to the hospital in Orofino, Idaho. She was in the Orofino hospital for a couple of weeks, then transferred to Gritman Medical Center in Moscow, Idaho for about a week. After this, Hospice set up a place for her at my sister’s house in Troy, Idaho for a brief time and all of her kids and family were able to be with her for this last week or so before she passed. During this time she was completely incapacitated with swollen limbs and unable to move around so that my sisters especially had to turn her, bath her and assist her as they could while she was bedridden the whole time. Her legs swelled to the point that her skin was tight and it split and it wept fluid to the point that it was just about impossible to keep her dry and comfortable. The last couple of days of her life were spent listening to her drown to death as her lungs filled with fluid and her breathing became increasingly difficult and shallow until at the end there was simply no more room in her lungs for air exchange. She passed 3 days after my parents 53 wedding anniversary at 72 years of age. Mom and dad had take-out Chinese food on their anniversary, on the edge of her hospice bed.
She was able to spend time fishing and huckleberrying with my dad her last summer (2015) and Hospice provided meds for her last couple of weeks, which we are thankful for, but this time was a nightmare for the entire family, knowing the outcome we faced. Her loss caused my dad extreme grief and we almost lost him also, over the coming months. Recently I was at his house and there was an ad on his TV about litigation that is occurring due to evident connections between the long-term use of talc powder and the development of uterine cancer. He said, “I haven’t called that number yet, but I should…, she (Mom) used to bath in the stuff.”
I feel that it is unfortunate that she developed this cancer by any means, but it is particularly painful to think that the initial treatment (robotic D&C using a Myosure morcellator) which she underwent may have helped to spread a particularly deadly cancer throughout her system. This procedure was recommended and carried out even though the medical record shows there was a known “suspicion for endometrial cancer.” Can you help? Please let me know. Thank you. Mark Lunders

Leave a Comment

Comment (required)

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

Name (required)
Email (required)
Phone (required)

DTLA Law Group

Free Case Review
Award Winning Service