Vaginal mesh update: Johnson & Johnson tried to stop report about mesh implants

Australian women are fighting against the pharmaceutical giant Johnson & Johnson, claiming that the company’s vaginal mesh implant ruined their lives.

Johnson & Johnson allegedly tried to stop a report being published about its pelvic mesh devices, according to The Guardian.

French authorities were planning to release a report on the mesh devices in 2007 which found that the devices required a proper randomised controlled trial before they could be approved.

The report showed that the Johnson & Johnson mesh products should only be used in clinical research until a trial had been completed. At this point in time the devices had been on the Australian market for two years.

Johnson & Johnson feared that the report could have a major impact on its business if made public. Concern was raised by Johnson & Johnson's subsidiary Ethicon. Meeting minutes showed in court detailed Ethicon stating that work was needed to "stop the publication". 

The trial involving over 700 women started in Australia’s federal court earlier this month. The women are alleging that Johnson & Johnson’s vaginal mesh implant was not adequately tested and that the company failed to warn patients and surgeons of the risk.

It’s not the first time Johnson & Johnson has had controversy surround its vaginal mesh implant. In 2016 the company agreed to pay over $120 million in relation to 2,000-3,000 US legal cases brought by women who claimed to have suffered organ damage due to vaginal mesh.

MPN discussed the issue earlier this year, with editor Lu Rahman writing that “vaginal mesh implants, made from polypropylene, are used to treat pelvic organ prolapse and incontinence following childbirth. However, some have been found to cut into the vagina, causing discomfort. Some of the women say they have been left unable to walk or have sex.”

The trial is expected to last for six months and it's possible Johnson & Johnson will have to pay out hundreds of millions to the affected women.

Speaking about Johnson & Johnson’s involvement in the case, barrister Tony Bannon SC said that the company did not properly communicate the risks of the vaginal mesh to either patients or surgeons and instead marketed the benefits of the products to surgeons.

Speaking during the trial’s opening statement, Bannon said: “They were overwhelmed by a tidal wave of aggressive promotion, designed to persuade both surgeons and patients of the quick, easy one operation able to resolve the particular difficulties.”

After facing legal action in the United States, Johnson & Johnson stopped selling the mesh. The company claimed it was a commercial decision.

Whilst Johnson & Johnson claim the vaginal mesh was supported by clinical research, clinicians involved in testing the device allegedly knew the risks the mesh presented.

Bannon cited an email exchange involving a French doctor who was running a clinical trial for the Johnson & Johnson implant. The doctor, Bernard Jacquetin allegedly stated that he wouldn’t like his own wife to undergo this procedure.

Johnson & Johnson has been unable to ascertain the total number of women adversely affected by the vaginal mesh implants. The company has sold over 100,000 mesh implants and stated that it’s the preferred option for pelvic conditions such as incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse.