Leiomyosarcoma Cancer Suit Filed Over Hysterectomy Morcellation Complications

Power Morcellation Cancer Suit

Written by Faith Anderson on August 26, 2014

Leiomyosarcoma Cancer Suit Filed Over Hysterectomy Morcellation Complications

Yet another product liability lawsuit has been filed over a cancer diagnosis following surgery with power morcellation.

A product liability complaint has been brought against the maker of a power morcellator product, alleging that use of the surgical device during a laparoscopic hysterectomy caused caused cancer cells to be spread throughout a New York woman’s body, upstaging her leiomyosarcoma cancer. The power morcellation suit was filed by Linda Bobletz in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York on August 18, and alleges that the Storz Rotocut G1 morcellator has a defective design and is unreasonably dangerous for women with undiagnosed leiomyosarcoma uterine cancer. If you have been diagnosed with late-stage cancer, and you believe morcellation surgery to be the cause, contact a reputable morcellation cancer attorney today to explore your possible compensation options.

Power Morcellators Linked to Cancer

According to the complaint, Bobletz underwent a laparoscopic supracervical hysterectomy to remove uterine fibroids in August 2011, at which time surgeons used the Storz power morcellator to cut up and remove the uterus through a small incision in her abdomen. Despite never having been diagnosed with cancer prior to surgery, only months after undergoing the hysterectomy with power morcellation, Bobletz was diagnosed with an aggressive and deadly form of uterine cancer known as leiomyosarcoma. Bobletz’s power morcellation suit comes just four months after the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued a warning, urging doctors not to use power morcellators during hysterectomies or myectomies (uterine fibroid removal), due to a risk of cancer cells within the uterus being spread throughout the body.

FDA’s Power Morcellation Warning

In its warning, the FDA estimated that approximately one in 350 women undergoing uterine fibroid surgery may have undiagnosed uterine cancer, which doctors may be unable to detect prior to conducting the surgical procedure. For these women, power morcellation during laparoscopic surgery may actually cause the cancerous tissue to be spread throughout the abdomen, quickly upstaging the cancer and, in turn, decreasing the chances for long-term survival. Shortly after the FDA warning was issued, Johnson & Johnson’s Ethicon unit, at the time the largest manufacturer of power morcellation devices, announced that it was removing its morcellators from the market, acknowledging that there is no way to make the surgical devices safe.

A Reputable Product Liability Lawyer Can Help

In her lawsuit, Bobletz alleges that Karl Storz Endoscopy, the maker of the Rotocut G1 morcellator, knew or should have known about the risk of cancerous cells being spread throughout the body during surgery with power morcellation, but failed to provide consumers and the medical community with adequate warnings about these risks. As a result, Bobletz is seeking compensatory and punitive damages from Storz for negligence, breach of warranty, strict product liability, and fraudulent misrepresentation and omission. If you believe you have been harmed by side effects of power morcellation, our consumer advocates at the Consumer Justice Foundation can help. We are dedicated to protecting the rights of consumers injured by defective products, and can help put you in touch with a qualified power morcellation cancer lawyer today.

Posted Under: Legal, Morcellation Cancer, Morcellator, News
Start Claim Now
Do you deserve compensation?

An attorney will review your situation for FREE and help you found out what really went wrong.

How Can We Reach You?

Please Explain Your Situation

By clicking the "Submit" button below, you agree that law firms you are matched with may contact you by telephone even if you are on a federal or state Do Not Call registry. Up to 10 law firms may respond to your request within approximately 2 weeks. In some cases 3 or more firms may respond to your request after 30 days. Use of this site is subject to our Terms of Use.
×