Arkansas Woman Files Lawsuit Over Uterine Perforation by Mirena® IUD

Arkansas-woman-files-lawsuit-mirena-IUDAn Arkansas woman who suffered serious and permanent injuries when her Mirena® intrauterine device (IUD) perforated her uterus has filed a lawsuit against Bayer Healthcare Pharmaceuticals, the device’s manufacturer.

The plaintiff received her Mirena® IUD in 2007. A follow-up exam in 2008 showed that the device was still in place, but in 2011, when the woman wanted the device removed so that she could become pregnant, her doctor could not locate the Mirena® IUD in her uterus. A CT scan revealed that the Mirena® IUD had perforated her uterus and migrated into the pelvic cavity. Laparoscopic surgery was required to remove the IUD.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has noted a number of serious side effects associated with the Mirena® IUD including uterine perforation and migration of the device, pain, pelvic inflammatory disease (PID), and intrauterine and ectopic pregnancies. In some women, the device has become embedded in the uterine wall.

Parker Waichman LLP filed the lawsuit on the woman’s behalf in the Superior Court of New Jersey Law Division, Morris County (Docket No. MRS L-0222-13). The suit alleges that the Mirena® IUD is defective and poses serious health risks to women who have had it implanted. A petition has been filed to consolidate Mirena® IUD lawsuits into a multidistrict litigation (MDL) in federal court in order to make pre-trial proceedings more efficient. Matthew J. McCauley, Senior Litigation Counsel at Parker Waichman LLP, co-chairs the American Association for Justice (AAJ) Mirena® IUD Litigation Group. The group exchanges educational materials and medical literature in order to best represent victims.

The lawsuit notes that this is not the first time Bayer has been accused of misrepresenting the Mirena® IUD device. In a 2009 letter, the Department of Health and Human Services’ Division of Drug Marketing, Advertising, and Communications (DDMAC) criticized Bayer for making unsubstantiated claims about the device while failing to mention its risks.

This entry was posted in Defective Medical Devices, Mirena IUD. Bookmark the permalink.

© 2005-2016 Parker Waichman LLP ®. All Rights Reserved.