We have helped to secure more than $80 billion in jury verdicts and settlements since 1955.
Covidien (now part of Medtronic) makes several hernia mesh lines, including Parietex, ProGrip, Symbotex, and related “composite” meshes. Plaintiffs in lawsuits against the manufacturer say these devices failed after implantation and caused serious problems. The cases are being brought as product-liability claims that focus on design defects, manufacturing problems, and failure to warn about known risks.
Our law firm is currently accepting Covidien hernia mesh lawsuits. Levin Papantonio hernia mesh lawyers are investigating cases where people received a Covidien hernia mesh device and experienced: additional surgeries, infections, bowel obstruction, organ damage, and/or chronic pain.
If you’ve suffered pain, infection, or additional surgery after hernia mesh implantation, you may be eligible for compensation.Call us now or fill out our secure form for a free, no-obligation consultation.You pay nothing unless we win your case.
Our lawyers want to keep informed. Here’s the latest news in the hernia mesh litigations involving Covidien:
October 2025
As of October 1, 2025, there are 2,152 Covidien hernia mesh lawsuits pending in the MDL.
September 2025
The Covidien hernia mesh MDL saw an increase in the number of cases filed. As of September 2, 2025, there are 2,090 cases pending.
July 2025
A federal magistrate judge overseeing more than 1,700 Covidien hernia mesh lawsuits has given both sides extra time to complete expert witness work and prepare key motions in several bellwether cases. The first trial, set for February 17, 2026, will still move forward as planned. That case involves Larry and Tammy Patterson from Alabama, who say a defective Symbotex mesh caused a bowel blockage that required surgery in 2020.
June 2025
In June 2025, the Covidien hernia mesh MDL added six new cases to reach 2,004. This MDL is still earlier in the process, with lawyers focusing on gathering evidence and preparing for the first bellwether trial.
May 2025
In May 2025, the Covidien hernia mesh MDL picked its second bellwether trial: a Mississippi woman’s case is set to start in July 2026. She claims the Symbotex mesh caused complications like chronic pain and infections because its coating didn’t work as intended. The first Covidien bellwether is scheduled for February 2026 and involves a different plaintiff from Alabama.
February 2025
The Covidien MDL has 1,660 pending claims.
January 2025
Attorneys for both sides submitted separate proposals to the MDL judge outlining plans for the Coviden bellwether trial process. The plaintiffs want to choose 16 cases by February. They plan to get these cases ready for trial. The first trial would start in September 2025. The defendants’ proposal suggests a more complicated way to choose cases. This will delay the first bellwether trial until 2026. The MDL judge will now determine whether to adopt one of these proposals or establish her own schedule.
December 2024
The May 2025 deadline for selecting the first bellwether trial case in the Covidien MDL has been pushed to July 2025.
January 2024
On January 2, 2024, the JPML reports 893 pending cases: MDL -3029 IN RE: Covidien Hernia Mesh Products Liability Litigation (No. II).
The Covidien hernia mesh litigation centers on polyester-based meshes and composite meshes that include coatings meant to reduce sticking. Plaintiffs argue the materials can shrink, stiffen, or break down, and the coatings don’t reliably prevent scar-tissue binding. Resulting injuries include nerve damage, bowel damage, and the need for further surgery.
Covidien is the only major mesh manufacturer that uses polyester for their mesh. “Polyester is the worst permanent implant material you could put in a patient’s body,” said Attorney Tim O’Brien, a lawyer from Levin Papantonio. O’Brien is leading the Covidien MDL with Kelsey Stokes.
Bellwether trials and settlement talks in related mesh litigations show how these cases can be valued, though every claim turns on its own facts.
In June 2022, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation created MDL 3029 IN RE: Covidien Hernia Mesh Products Liability Litigation No. II. The panel assigned Judge Patti B. Saris from the District of Massachusetts to oversee this case. Chief Magistrate Judge M. Page Kelley will also be working on MDL 3029.
The lawsuits most often name Parietex-family meshes and sister products. Common models include:
Medtronic’s product catalog confirms the families and indications, including inguinal, ventral, parastomal, and abdominal wall repairs. FDA recall records also identify specific Parietex products by name, such as Parietex Composite Parastomal Mesh and Hydrophilic Anatomical Mesh.
Each year, surgeons perform approximately one million hernia repair surgeries in the United States. According to the FDA, most hernia repair surgeries use surgical mesh, made from either synthetic or animal tissue.
A key concern with hernias is strangulation. This happens when an organ pushes through the abdominal wall or tissue, blocking blood supply to an organ. Surgeons often use hernia mesh in hernia repair procedures to prevent reocurring hernias. The devices reinforce the area where a hernia is protruding.
Parietex Composite meshes are designed to reinforce weak tissue during hernia repair. They combine a polyester base for strength with a biocompatible coating or film intended to reduce sticking while tissue grows into the mesh. In theory, the mesh provides long-term support while the coating limits adhesions to the bowel and other organs.
These products are cleared for abdominal wall and incisional hernias, and there are specialized versions for parastomal repairs and ventral patches. The “optimized” and “open-skirt” variants are marketed as improvements in handling and tissue integration.
Plaintiffs say the polyester base can shrink, stiffen, or fray, and that the protective film can fail, allowing organs to stick to the mesh. They also allege the mesh can curl or tear at fixation points, which can lead to recurrence and pain. Attorneys point to recall activity and labeling issues as signs of broader problems, even when recalls cite limited reasons like mislabeling or specific batches.
FDA recall notices show real-world quality issues, such as mispackaged “left vs. right” anatomical meshes that could contribute to failure or recurrence. While those recalls do not prove general defect, they are part of the record plaintiffs use to argue risk and inadequate controls.
ProGrip is a self-gripping mesh. Instead of many sutures or tacks, it uses thousands of tiny microgrips to hold the mesh in place against tissue. The idea is to reduce operative time and fixation trauma while giving strong, even contact for tissue ingrowth during inguinal or ventral repairs.
By limiting heavy fixation, ProGrip aims to decrease post-op pain and speed recovery. In practice, surgeons still often choose selective sutures or tacks in high-tension areas, but the mesh is designed to provide primary fixation on its own.
Claimants argue the microgrips can cause excessive inflammation, nerve irritation, or stiffness that leads to chronic pain. They also allege that, like other polyester-based meshes, ProGrip may shrink or stiffen over time, putting tension on nerves and nearby structures. When that happens, patients can face pain, recurrence, or the need for revision surgery.
Some lawsuits claim removal is harder when microgrips bond to tissue, increasing the complexity of revision surgery. That can raise the risk of scarring or nerve damage during explant.
If your Covidien or Medtronic mesh caused pain, infection, or another surgery, our legal team can help.We’ll review your medical records and identify whether you qualify for compensation.Call today or complete the form below — there’s no fee unless we recover for you.
“Optimized” and “open-skirt” versions are marketed as enhancements that improve conformability and coverage, especially for abdominal wall reinforcement. The mesh and coating aim to balance strength and handling on the tissue side with reduced organ adhesion on the visceral side.
Open-skirt designs are intended to give surgeons more flexibility in tailoring the implant to the defect. The goal is a stable repair with fewer adhesions and smoother placement in complex ventral or incisional hernias.
Plaintiffs argue the same basic risks show up: polyester-base shrinkage, fraying at the edges, and coating failure that can allow bowel to adhere. Some cases also claim the “skirt” design can curl or not integrate evenly, creating ridges that irritate tissue.
Even when the coating is intact early, patients and experts for plaintiffs allege long-term degradation or cracking can occur, letting tissue bind to the mesh. That can raise the risk of pain, obstruction, or the need for surgical takedown.
Parastomal meshes are customized to reinforce the abdominal wall around a stoma. The composite design seeks to reduce adhesions to the bowel while supporting the area around the stoma to lower the chance of hernia or recurrence.
These models are intended to distribute forces around the stoma opening and resist migration. They are a specialized tool for a demanding repair, where both support and low-adhesion surfaces matter.
The FDA announced a Class II recall of Parietex Composite Parastomal Mesh in 2018, which was later terminated in 2020. While that recall does not by itself prove defect, plaintiffs cite it to show quality and performance concerns. Allegations include mesh shrinkage, stiffening, and adhesion formation leading to pain and bowel issues.
Patients who need revision around a stoma face complex surgery. If the mesh binds to bowel, surgeons may need to free adhesions or re-site the stoma, which adds risk and recovery time.
Symbotex is often grouped with Parietex and ProGrip because it uses similar polyester and composite designs. The theory is the same: polyester can become brittle, shrink, or tear at fixation points, and coatings may not prevent adhesions long-term.
Whether a specific Symbotex or lightweight model is implicated in a case depends on operative records. Your medical chart and implant sticker will identify the exact product used in your repair.
When a mesh shrinks, stiffens, or pulls, it can place pressure on nerves and tissue, causing chronic groin or abdominal pain. If the coating fails or the mesh erodes, bowel and other organs can adhere to it, raising the risk of obstruction, fistula, or perforation. Infections and abscesses can also form around a contaminated or eroding implant.
These complications often trigger more procedures, including revision or full mesh removal. Some patients need bowel resection or multiple surgeries to fix adhesions and scarring. Recovery can be long, expensive, and life-changing, which is why damages in strong cases can be significant.
Regulators published recalls involving Parietex Composite Parastomal Mesh (2018) and Parietex Hydrophilic Anatomical Mesh (2021 mislabeling). There was also a 2023 recall regarding a Parietex Composite polyester horseshoe-shaped model. Recalls can be limited to labeling or batch issues, but they still matter in litigation records.
Even so, plaintiffs say the underlying polyester and coating designs create broader risks that recalls don’t fully address. Your case will look at your exact model, lot, and medical course.
Values vary widely. Reported settlement ranges go from tens of thousands into six figures for serious, well-documented injuries, with rare cases higher. Prior settlements and verdicts in other mesh MDLs help provide context, but every Covidien case depends on medical proof, number of surgeries, and lasting disability.
Because Covidien litigation is still active, global figures change with bellwethers and negotiations. A free case review helps estimate value after we confirm the product used, your injuries, and your state’s laws.
If you have suffered injuries because of a hernia mesh, our law firm will review the details of your case. Compensation and the amount of a settlement or verdict depend on multiple factors, including the type and extent of your injury. Types of damages you might collect include:
You might qualify for a hernia mesh lawsuit if you had a Covidien, Parietex, ProGrip, or Symbotex mesh and later developed chronic pain, infection, hernia recurrence, bowel obstruction, or needed revision or removal. Medical records confirming the implant model and your follow-up care are required.
Deadlines apply. Many states use a “discovery rule,” which starts the clock when you knew or should have known the mesh caused your injury. Acting quickly helps protect your rights.
Our hernia mesh lawyers will gather your surgical notes, implant labels, and imaging, then consult medical and engineering experts to link the product to your injuries. We analyze recalls and design details for your exact model.
Our firm handles filings, discovery, negotiations, and trial preparation so you can focus on recovery.
Most mesh cases resolve without a personal trial appearance, but we prepare as if yours will go to trial. That approach often helps drive fair settlements.
The FDA reports multiple risks of surgical mesh in hernia repair surgery. Here are some common issues and complications with hernia mesh that have prompted lawsuits:
Many other complications can stem from hernia mesh device failure. These include:
If you or a loved one were injured by defective hernia mesh, our lawyers are here to help. Contact our law firm today for a free case review at (800) 277-1193 or fill out the Free Case Evaluation Form below.
You don’t have to face this alone. Our attorneys will confirm your implant, document your injuries, and explain your options clearly.Call now or use our secure form to schedule your free consultation.There are no upfront fees — we only get paid if we win your case.
Abdominal wall hernias often require surgical correction. A surgeon can typically repair a hernia without the use of a mesh product. Also, the surgeon can use a material that poses less risks than many synthetic products currently on the market.
Many manufacturers rushed their synthetic hernia mesh productsto the market using the FDA’s 510k clearance process. Companies manufactured and marketed the devices with little to no studies as to their safety. Since then, manufacturers have silently withdrawn many of these devices. In some cases, the mesh devices have been recalled.
These problematic hernia mesh devices contain design defects and undisclosed or under-disclosed risks, such as:
If you received a hernia mesh implant, watch for these signs and symptoms:
If you experience these symptoms, immediately report them to your treating physician. Hernia mesh complications can occur within days to years following a hernia mesh implant.
Your healthcare provider should keep the hernia mesh and tissue after removing it from your body. This is an important piece of evidence in your case.
Your medical care professional can learn more about this procedure by contacting a hernia mesh lawyer.
Surgeons use these devices in the repair of various types of hernias. Medline Plus outlines the types of hernias, based on their location:
Manufacturers construct hernia mesh from either synthetic or animal tissue. Hernia mesh products consist of absorbable or non-absorbable material.
Numerous studies and FDA reports have discussed hernia mesh implants, their effectiveness, and adverse outcomes from implants.
Hernia Surgical Mesh Implants
Hernias have a high rate of recurrence. Surgeons often use surgical mesh to strengthen the hernia repair and reduce the risk. Still, in some situations, using surgical mesh for hernia repair may not be recommended.
Comparison of Two Mesh/Fixation Concepts for Laparoscopic Ventral and Incisional Hernia Repair
This was a randomized controlled trial comparing two systems of mesh and fixation for laparoscopic ventral and incisional hernia repair. Researches terminated the study early upon noticing a high recurrence rate.
Comparison of outcomes of synthetic mesh vs suture repair of elective primary ventral herniorrhaphy
Mesh repair has a small reduction in recurrence rates compared with suture repairs for primary ventral hernias. However, mesh shows an increased risk of seroma and surgical site infections.
Long-term Recurrence and Complications Associated With Elective Incisional Hernia Repair
Researchers found sutured repair posed a higher risk of repoeration for recurrence over 5 years (compared with open mesh and laparoscopic mesh repair) among patients undergoing incisional repair. However, in long-term follow-up, these benefits of mesh are offset in part by mesh-related complications.
Ventral hernia repair with synthetic, composite, and biologic mesh: characteristics, indications, and infection profile
Prosthetic mesh devices comprise three main types:
Prospective Study Of A Size Tailored Approach to Repair Umbilical And Epigastric Primary Ventral Hernias
Primary ventral hernias, (umbilical and epigastric hernias, for example) primarily use mesh for abdominal wall reinforcement. Mesh-devices using a dual-sided mesh technology exist for the specific indication of small ventral hernias. This study was to determine the best size hernia meshes to use in different situations. However, researchers terminated the study after noting an abnormally high rate of infections.
Complications of mesh devices for intraperitoneal umbilical hernia repair: a word of caution
“We have seen several patients with serious late complications of these meshes placed intraperitoneally. Some of these patients needed small bowel resection and mesh removal. Others developed a recurrence because of improper deployment of the mesh in the intraperitoneal position.”
Our law firm will investigate your claim, calculate your damages, and fight to get you the compensation you deserve.
If you or a loved one suffered injuries from defective hernia mesh, our lawyers can help. Reach out to our law firm today for a free case review by calling (800) 277-1193 or filling out the Free Case Evaluation Form below.
By selecting "I Agree" below and clicking the "Submit for Free Evaluation” button, I agree to the POLICIES AND DISCLAIMERS, including arbitration provision therein, and consent to receive marketing emails, calls and/or texts, including those made using an automated system and/or artificial/prerecorded voice message, from or on behalf of Levin Papantonio Law Firm (“LP”) / Pensacola, FL / 850-435-7000 / levinlaw.com, regarding their services in response to my inquiry at the telephone number(s) provided above, even if that number is currently listed on any state, federal or corporate Do Not Call registry. I understand my consent to receive automated marketing calls/texts is not required as a condition of purchasing any services. I can revoke my consent at any time. Review LP's Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy here.
Opt in to Receive Calls, Text Messages, and Emails
By checking the below box and clicking “SUBMIT”, I agree to the Terms of the Policies and Procedures of the referenced entity, including individual arbitration provisions therein. I also consent to receive marketing emails, calls, and/or text messages, including those made using an automated system and/or artificial/prerecorded voice message (including artificial intelligence (AI)-generated voices), from or on behalf of the referenced entity regarding its services and/or my inquiry at the telephone number provided above, even if currently listed on any state or federal Do Not Call registry. I understand that my consent to receive automated marketing calls/texts is not required as a condition of purchasing any services, and that I may opt out of such calls/texts at any time.
Levin Law
Levin Law