Super Lawyers
Illinois State Bar Association
Justia Lawyer Rating
Million Dollar Advocates Forum
Avvo Rating
BBB Accredited Business

Surgical Stapler Recall and Injury Lawyers

Surgical Staple ErrorRosenfeld Injury Lawyers LLC represents clients who have been injured by surgical staplers. Thousands of surgical stapler lawsuits have been brought against medical device manufacturers by patients who have suffered internal bleeding, organ damage, death, and other life-threatening injuries after undergoing gastric bypass, heart surgery, and other medical procedures involving defective surgical staplers. If you have been injured from surgery involving staplers, you might be eligible to receive a large financial settlement in a product liability lawsuit.

The modern surgical stapler was invented and marketed in the 1960s as a time-saving alternative to manual sutures that surgeons made to close wounds after a surgical procedure. According to adverse event reports the two primary manufacturers of gastric bypass staplers in the U.S. are Ethicon and Medtronic (which purchased Covidien, formerly U.S. Surgical Corp., in 2015). Public databases show that both have had serious problems reported with their products. Maquet Medical Systems Inc. makes the TigerPaw brand of staplers which are primarily used in heart surgery and which was recalled for safety defects by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2015.

If your family member has been seriously injured or killed by a surgical stapling procedure, you likely have questions about your legal rights. This web page will address the following issues:

How are Surgical Staplers Used in Gastric Bypass Procedures?

Over nine million Americans are classified as morbidly obese. Gastric bypass surgery involving stapling has become commonly used as a last resort when diet and other weight-reduction measures fail to control a patient’s obesity. Gastric bypass divides the stomach into two separate parts, one of which is a very small upper pouch and the other which is the remainder of the stomach.

The surgical stapler allows surgeons to close the incisions made during the procedure, which are too large for stitches. After the surgery, patients eat less because the upper portion of the stomach becomes full more quickly, controlling the appetite.

In the case of morbid obesity, which seriously threatens a person’s health and life expectancy, successful gastric bypass surgery (bariatric surgery) can prove to be a lifesaver. But while the surgery has proven successful for the right patients, it has also had disastrous consequences when performed negligently or when a malfunction occurs with the stapling devices causes a gastrointestinal injury.

[Back to Top]

What Injuries Have Been Associated With Defective Surgical Staplers?

Since they came into widespread use, surgical staplers have been cited in numerous complaints as being unreliable and unsafe. In May 2019, the Food and Drug Administration acknowledged receiving more than 110,000 surgical stapler malfunction reports between 2011 and 2018, more than half of which had never been publicly disclosed. About 56,000 reports had been kept out of the FDA’s publicly available online “Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience” (MAUDE) database. According to the agency, there have been more than 400 patient deaths related to defective surgical staplers since 2011.

Problems that have been reported with these devices include their failure to form correct staples, inability to properly “fire,” and surgical staples that later come loose or fail to keep the incision closed.

Serious injuries that can result from the use of a surgical stapler on a patient include:
  • Internal bleeding caused by failure to close the wound or from the staple site itself
  • The leakage of stomach acid from internal organs that reopen after bypass procedures
  • Infection of the staple site or the incision
  • Hernia due to stapler malfunction
  • Septic shock, an infection which reaches the bloodstream and travels to major organs
These and other complications often require the patient to undergo one or more corrective surgeries. In the most severe cases, complications from defective surgical staplers can result in the death of the patient.

In recent years, victims and their families have successfully filed surgical stapler lawsuits against medical device-maker Ethicon for product liability, which holds the manufacturer of a product responsible for any injuries the product causes when it is used as intended. Rather than responding to reports of adverse events by recalling their products or improving their designs, the surgical stapler manufacturers have chosen instead to deflect blame onto surgeons alleging their medical malpractice is the source of patient injury.

Ethicon has repeatedly claimed the equipment malfunctions are the result of physician error, but it is becoming increasingly difficult to substantiate this claim when the devices, not the surgeons, have become the common denominator in tens of thousands of incidents.

[Back to Top]

What Stapler Brands Have Been Reported to Malfunction Most Often?

According to the FDA’s MAUDE database, which lists adverse events involving surgical staplers going back to 2009, the following Ethicon products have been cited most often in public database reports as frequently leading to surgical complications and injury:
  • Echelon Flex60
  • Echelon Flex45
  • Echelon 60
  • Echelon Endopath
The following Medtronic/Covidien staplers have each had dozens of reported malfunctions during surgery:
  • Endo Gia
  • Signia
If you underwent a surgical stapling procedure and suffered injuries due to staples not forming correctly or failing to close your wound, you may be entitled to receive compensation from the medical device manufacturer for the cost of medical treatment required to correct the issue, medical bills, pain, and suffering you experienced, and any other financial losses you incurred as a result.

[Back to Top]

How is the TigerPaw Surgical Stapler Used in Open Heart Surgery?

A device commonly used in open-heart surgery is a surgical stapler called the TigerPaw II, which is used to close the tissue in the heart that was opened during surgery to correct atrial fibrillation. In March of 2015, the TigerPaw was recalled when it was discovered the devices not only failed to perform their intended function but could cause additional injury that can lead to serious complications or death.

The surgical stapler lawyers at Rosenfeld Injury Lawyers LLC are actively involved with potential claims and lawsuits involving the Tiger Paw surgical stapler. If you or a loved one suffered surgical stapler injuries such as internal bleeding, blood clots, infection, heart failure, heart attack, stroke or death following heart surgery, let our office investigate the matter for you with no up-front cost on your part.

The function of the TigerPaw System II

Atrial fibrillation occurs when the upper chambers of the heart fail to maintain a steady rhythm, leading to the possible formation of blood clots in the heart which can cause cardiac arrest or stroke. If you suffer from this condition, you may have been placed on blood-thinning medication as a means of preventing these clots.

However, blood thinners come with risks and complications of their own, so your doctor might recommend surgery to prevent blood from clotting in the upper chambers of your heart. The left atrium is the most common area for clots to form, so your surgeon would close the left atrial appendage during the procedure using the TigerPaw System to staple the area shut.

[Back to Top]

How Have TigerPaw Staplers Allegedly Harmed Patients?

Reports began to surface that patients undergoing surgery using the TigerPaw System II experienced serious complications and injuries to their hearts. Among the adverse events were reported that the staples tore the atrial wall and caused significant internal bleeding. In other cases, the device failed to seal the left atrial appendage, which allowed blood clots to form, rendering the procedure ineffective.

Reports of injuries with the TigerPaw System II include the following:
  • Internal bleeding from tears in the atrial wall or at the site where the staples were placed
  • Infections resulting from bleeding or injuries experienced during the procedure
  • Heart failure due to bleeding or infection
  • Death from any of the aforementioned complications

[Back to Top]

Why was the TigerPaw Stapler Recalled?

The Class I designation given to a recall by the FDA indicates the product is capable of causing serious harm. Most medical device recalls receiving this classification can cause debilitating or fatal injuries. As a result of the FDA’s order, Maquet Medical Systems has recalled over 4,100 of its TigerPaw System II stapling devices and instructed surgeons to discontinue using or remove the devices from patients.

It is anticipated that patients who underwent stapling procedures prior to this recall may have valid claims against Maquet Medical Systems, which purchased the previous manufacturer of the device in 2013. To learn more about current litigation and how it may affect your own claim, contact Rosenfeld Injury Lawyers. We can advise you of your legal options and help you determine whether it is in your best interests to file a lawsuit of your own.

[Back to Top]

Our Surgical Stapler Injury Lawyers can Help You Win Compensation

Rosenfeld Injury Lawyers LLC has represented thousands of clients in medical negligence and product liability claims. Our law firm's success stems from our unique ability access to a team of experts in fields that are crucial to building your case, establishing its value, and presenting it effectively in front of a jury. By enlisting the assistance of experts in fields such as medicine and economics, we are able to successfully argue your case to ensure that your present and future expenses are covered.

If you have been injured from any kind of stapling surgery, Rosenfeld Injury Lawyers has the resources needed to represent your interests and see that you receive fair compensation for your injuries. Arrange a risk-free and confidential consultation with us today to learn how we can help you secure the compensation needed to pay for your care. Our surgical stapler attorneys can advise you on your legal options and how best to pursue your claim. If for any reason we are unable to secure a financial recovery on your behalf, you will not be charged for our legal services.


The following FDA database contains malfunction reports on staplers and other medical devices dating back to 2009:

Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database

Client Reviews
Jonathan Rosenfeld was professionally objective, timely, and knowledgeable. Also, his advice was extremely effective regarding my case. In addition, Jonathan was understanding and patient pertaining to any of my questions or concerns. I was very happy with the end result and I highly recommend Jonathan Rosenfeld. Michonne Proulx
Extremely impressed with this law firm. They took control of a bad motorcycle crash that left my uncle seriously injured. Without any guarantee of a financial recovery, they went out and hired accident investigators and engineers to help prove how the accident happened. I am grateful that they worked on a contingency fee basis as there was no way we could have paid for these services on our own. Ethan Armstrong
This lawyer really helped me get compensation for my motorcycle accident case. I know there is no way that I could have gotten anywhere near the amount that Mr. Rosenfeld was able to get to settle my case. Thank you. Daniel Kaim
Jonathan helped my family heal and get compensation after our child was suffered a life threatening injury at daycare. He was sympathetic and in constant contact with us letting us know all he knew every step of the way. We were so blessed to find Jonathan! Giulia
Jonathan did a great job helping my family navigate through a lengthy lawsuit involving my grandmother's death in a nursing home. Through every step of the case, Jonathan kept my family informed of the progression of the case. Although our case eventually settled at a mediation, I really was impressed at how well prepared Jonathan was to take the case to trial. Lisa