It was supposed to be the small operation. Day surgery, back on your feet by the weekend, no more crossing your legs when you sneeze. Nobody said the word permanent in a way you understood. And nobody said that the pain arriving years later would be the hardest part to explain to anyone.
🔒 Encrypted & handled per our Privacy Policy
Mesh cases filed across seven
federal MDLs, now all closed
Reported paid by manufacturers
to resolve mesh claims
Cases still active in the New Jersey
Ethicon mesh litigation
Upfront cost to have
your case reviewed
These claims are about mesh implanted through the vagina — for prolapse or for leaking — that went on to cause harm. In 2026 the biggest question is not what happened to you. It is what your state’s deadline says.
Meeting these guidelines does not mean you have a valid claim. It means a participating law firm is likely to review it. Firms are far more selective in mesh cases than they were during the MDL years, because each case is now litigated individually rather than as part of a large group. That firm decides on its own whether to take your case. Many claims are turned down, most often on the filing deadline, and some recover nothing. Direct2Attorney cannot judge the legal merits of your case, give legal advice, or file anything for you.
That is a separate litigation with different manufacturers, different courts and different deadlines, even though both use polypropylene mesh. Say so on the form and you will be pointed to the right place rather than the wrong one.
— Educational
Mesh removal is major surgery, and it is not always complete or successful. Mesh integrates into tissue, which is what it was designed to do, and taking it out can carry its own risks. Nothing on this page is medical advice and nothing here is a recommendation to have or refuse any procedure.
If you are in pain, the person to see is a urogynecologist or a female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery specialist — ideally one who handles mesh complications regularly. That is a medical conversation, and it is separate from any legal question. You do not have to resolve one before starting the other.
Transvaginal mesh is a woven sheet or tape of polypropylene, the same family of plastic used in many surgical implants. It was placed through the vagina to hold up organs that had dropped — pelvic organ prolapse — or to support the urethra so that coughing, laughing and lifting no longer caused leaking, which is stress urinary incontinence.
The appeal was obvious. It was quicker than stitching a woman’s own tissue, it could be done in a day, and it was marketed as a lasting fix. Many of these devices reached the market through the FDA’s 510(k) pathway, which allows a new device to be cleared by showing it is substantially similar to one already sold, without new clinical trials in patients.
The problem is what happens after the mesh is in. Polypropylene can stiffen and degrade in the body. The mesh can contract and pull on the tissue it was anchored to, it can erode through the vaginal wall, and it can wrap around or irritate nerves. The resulting pain is often chronic, and because the mesh becomes part of the surrounding tissue, it can be extremely difficult to remove entirely.
These are not rare or theoretical complaints. They are the injuries behind more than 100,000 lawsuits, and they are why the FDA acted.
The FDA issued public safety communications in 2008 and 2011 about complications from transvaginal mesh, and in 2016 reclassified mesh for transvaginal prolapse repair as a high-risk device requiring premarket approval.
In April 2019 the agency ordered manufacturers to stop selling surgical mesh for transvaginal repair of prolapse, having concluded the makers had not shown a reasonable assurance of safety and effectiveness. Mid-urethral slings for incontinence were not part of that order and remain on the market.
Manufacturers have consistently defended these products. Their position is that the devices were properly cleared, that they helped many women, and that the complications alleged are known risks of pelvic surgery that were disclosed in the instructions for use given to surgeons.
They also argue that outcomes turn on surgical technique and individual anatomy rather than device design. Juries have gone both ways on these arguments, there have been very large plaintiff verdicts and there have been clear defense verdicts.
Transvaginal mesh produced one of the largest groups of product liability cases in U.S. history: seven separate MDLs, all before Judge Joseph R. Goodwin in the Southern District of West Virginia, covering Ethicon, Boston Scientific, C.R. Bard, American Medical Systems, Coloplast, Cook and Neomedic. More than 100,000 cases were filed and the large majority were resolved there.
Those MDLs closed between 2019 and 2022. There is no mesh MDL to join today. Any case filed now is an individual lawsuit in state court, standing on its own facts.
New Jersey runs two coordinated multicounty litigations for pelvic mesh — one for Ethicon Gynecare products and one for C.R. Bard — managed together in Bergen County. Case management orders in 2026 report more than 560 active Ethicon cases at various stages, with discovery deadlines extended and schedules set for expert discovery and pretrial motions. Cases have also been filed in the states where manufacturers are headquartered, including Massachusetts and Minnesota.
Reported settlements across all manufacturers have exceeded $8 billion, though many individual agreements are confidential and the real figure is likely higher. Appellate courts have upheld multi-million dollar mesh verdicts in recent years, and separate state consumer-protection actions have produced large judgments against Ethicon.
For many women, the deadline has already passed. Most of this mesh was implanted between 1998 and 2019, and in most states the statute of limitations for a surgery that long ago expired years ago. That is the plain truth, and it is the first thing a firm will look at.
It is not the whole truth, though. Many states apply a discovery rule, where the clock starts when you knew or reasonably should have known that the mesh caused your injury — which can be far later than the implant date, particularly if you were told for years that your pain was something else. A recent revision surgery, a recent erosion, or recently learning which device you had can all matter. Deadlines vary by state and only an attorney licensed in yours can tell you which one applies. Getting that answer takes one conversation and costs nothing.
Mesh eroding or poking through the vaginal wall, sometimes felt by a partner before anyone else notices. Pelvic, groin or lower back pain that will not settle. Pain during sex, for you or your partner. Urinary tract infections that keep coming back. Unusual bleeding or discharge. Trouble emptying your bladder, or leaking that got worse rather than better. Pain running down into the thigh or leg. If you had mesh and any of this sounds familiar, see a doctor and tell them you have an implant. Ask specifically about a urogynecologist or a specialist in female pelvic medicine. This page is general information, not medical advice.
— Compensation
If a claim succeeds, compensation is meant to cover what the mesh has cost you — the operations, the years of managing it, and the parts of ordinary life it took away.
— The process
You do not need the device name, the operative report or a diagnosis code to begin. Tell us what you remember.
Roughly when the mesh went in, what it was for, and what has gone wrong since. Two minutes, no cost, no obligation. Approximate dates are fine.
This is the step that matters most in mesh cases. A participating firm should tell you plainly whether your state’s filing deadline has likely run, and whether anything in your history changes that. If the answer is no, you should hear it in that first call.
You sign an authorization. The firm requests the operative report, the implant sticker from your hospital chart, billing records and your treatment history, which together show which mesh you had and what it did.
Your case is filed as an individual lawsuit in the appropriate state court, which may be New Jersey or your home state. Your firm keeps you updated. You are never required to accept an offer you do not want.
💰
The review is free. Participating firms work on contingency, so a fee is owed only out of a recovery. No recovery, no attorney fee.
⚖️
Many firms closed mesh intake when the MDLs ended. We connect you with ones still reviewing individual cases in state court.
Hardly any woman knows the brand of her implant. Operative reports and hospital records answer it, and a firm can request them.
These are personal, often painful details. Your information is encrypted and handled according to our Privacy Policy.
What Direct2Attorney is
A legal marketing and referral service. We check whether your situation matches what participating law firms are looking for, and connect you with one of them if it does.
What Direct2Attorney is not
We are not a law firm. We cannot give you legal advice, represent you, or file anything on your behalf. Only a law firm you sign with can do that.
If you had mesh or a bladder sling and have been living with pain, erosion or repeat surgeries, the question worth answering is whether your state’s deadline has run. For some women it has. For others it has not, and they never asked. Finding out takes about two minutes and costs nothing.
Participating law firms are generally reviewing claims from women who had surgical mesh implanted through the vagina to treat pelvic organ prolapse or stress urinary incontinence, including bladder slings, and who later developed complications such as mesh erosion, chronic pelvic pain, infection, organ perforation or pain during sex. Cases involving revision or removal surgery are the strongest. Because the federal MDLs have closed, the filing deadline in your state is now the single biggest factor in whether a claim can still be brought.
No. Seven federal transvaginal mesh MDLs were consolidated before Judge Joseph R. Goodwin in the Southern District of West Virginia, covering more than 100,000 cases. They have all closed, the last of them in 2022. Claims today are filed as individual lawsuits in state court. New Jersey is the most active venue, with coordinated multicounty litigation for Ethicon Gynecare mesh and for Bard pelvic mesh, and hundreds of cases still on those dockets.
For many women, yes. Most mesh was implanted between roughly 1998 and 2019, and the filing deadline in most states has long passed for those surgeries. But the deadline does not always run from the implant date. Many states use a discovery rule, where the clock starts when you knew or reasonably should have known that the mesh caused your injury, which can be much later. Recent revision surgery, a recent diagnosis or a recently identified device can matter. Only an attorney licensed in your state can tell you which deadline applies to you, and that answer costs nothing to get.
Both have been the subject of litigation. The FDA ordered manufacturers to stop selling surgical mesh for transvaginal repair of pelvic organ prolapse in April 2019. Mid-urethral slings used for stress urinary incontinence, including TVT and TOT type slings, were not part of that order and are still on the market, but sling cases have been filed, tried and settled throughout this litigation. If you had a sling, say so during the review.
Yes. Most women were never told the brand name, and the surgery may have been described only as a sling or a prolapse repair. Identifying the device is normally done from the operative report, the implant sticker in the hospital chart and the billing records, which a law firm can request with your written authorization. Not having the paperwork is not a reason to skip a review.
Common reported complications include mesh eroding or being exposed through the vaginal wall, chronic pelvic or groin pain, pain during sex for you or your partner, recurrent urinary tract infections, unusual bleeding or discharge, difficulty urinating or worsening incontinence, and pain radiating into the thigh or leg. Some problems appear within months and others years later. These symptoms should be evaluated by a doctor, ideally a urogynecologist or a female pelvic medicine specialist. Nothing on this page is medical advice.
No. Hernia mesh is a separate litigation with different manufacturers, different products, different courts and different deadlines, even though both involve polypropylene mesh. If your mesh was implanted to repair a hernia rather than through the vagina, tell us during the review so you are pointed to the right place.
Almost certainly not for the same injury. Settlements in this litigation normally included a release, meaning you gave up the right to sue that manufacturer over that device. If you had a second, different mesh implanted later, or believe your settlement did not cover a particular claim, mention it during the review so a firm can look at the paperwork.
Nothing to ask. The case review is free with no obligation. If a participating law firm takes your case, it will normally work on contingency. That means the fee comes out of a recovery, and no fee is owed if there is no recovery.
No. Direct2Attorney is a legal marketing and referral service, not a law firm. An attorney-client relationship may form only after a participating law firm reviews your information and signs a separate representation agreement with you.
Ask it on the call. The review is free, and there is no obligation to move forward.
— News & updates
Explore how victims of transvaginal mesh complications are claiming compensation. Real-world case examples and legal Q&A guide you through your
