Stryker Hip Replacement Lawsuits

As of August 2023, there were two different multidistrict litigations with a group of consolidated lawsuits addressing concerns over Stryker hip replacements. Each MDL focuses on specific Stryker hip replacement devices, but injuries sustained by the plaintiffs are similar and due to design defects within the Stryker models.

MDL number 2768 in Massachusetts addresses LFIT Anatomic CoCR V40 femoral head defects, and MDL number 2441 in Minnesota addresses Rejuvenate and ABG II hip implant defects. Lawyers are still taking cases and litigation continues in Tritanium Acetabular Shell lawsuits.

Stryker hip replacement device MDLs 2768 and 2441 are no longer accepting cases, and the company reached settlements with most claimants in 2014. Individuals may still file personal injury suits for injuries sustained through either the LFIT Anatomic CoCR V40 femoral head or the Rejuvenate and ABG II devices.

After surgery to implant Stryker Tritanium Acetabular Shell hip replacement devices, many people reported loosening of the shells of the cups of the device. Loosening can occur because the cement holding the metal components together or the metal components themselves wear out through regular joint movement.

A 2018 study found that these changes to the device could lead to “poorer clinical function” within one year and recommended doctors monitor these patients.

Loosening can cause hip and groin pain, and some patients need revision surgery. Revision surgery is a major procedure and has associated risks, such as infection.

Infections after hip replacement surgery can be dangerous. They can occur years after surgery and may develop deep within the tissue surrounding the implant, sometimes leading to repeated hospital stays.

Doctors at NYU Langone Orthopedic Hospital studied five patients who experienced failures of Stryker’s Tritanium cup devices implanted between 2011 and 2016.

These doctors said imaging showed loose Tritanium components were damaging the soft tissue surrounding the joint. All five patients underwent surgery to correct the issues caused by the devices.

Stryker recalled 42,519 LFIT V40 devices in 2016, citing “higher than expected” complication rates, prompting hundreds of people to file lawsuits. One of those claimants was Mern Direnzo, who received the LFIT Anatomic V40 Femoral Head in 2009.

Blood tests showed high levels of metal ions in her blood and urine after the procedure, and Direnzo underwent revision surgery to remove the implant. Direnzo filed a Stryker hip implant lawsuit in 2014.

In November 2018, Stryker and lawyers for plaintiffs suing the company over damages caused by its LFIT V40 Femoral Head device announced an initial settlement agreement. Federal court documents confirm that the agreement included lawsuits combined in a New Jersey multicounty litigation, but the settlement terms are confidential.

As of July 2023, there were hundreds of lawsuits pending resolution in Massachusetts federal court.

In 2012, Stryker issued a Field Safety Notice indicating that its Rejuvenate and ABG II models had a high rate of adverse local tissue reaction caused by inflammation in the tissue near the implant.

Chromium and cobalt compose the neck components of the Rejuvenate and ABG II models, and the stems have a titanium coating. When the metal parts rub against each other where the neck meets the stem, they can shed metallic debris into the body.

The metal ions released into the surrounding tissue can cause inflammation and prompt an immunological response leading to metallosis, tissue and bone death, and pain. People with a metal sensitivity may experience a severe allergic reaction.

Patients required revision surgery in many of these cases. Stryker issued a recall for the two models of hip replacement devices in July 2012. Stryker also offered to reimburse patients for testing, treatment, revision surgery and other expenses connected to health complications from the recalled models.

When choosing a Stryker hip replacement lawyer, the most important thing to look for is experience with similar hip implant cases. Stryker hip implant lawsuits are complex litigations that require a legal team with experience handling defective medical device cases.

Some examples of other defective implant lawsuits include the DePuy ASR and Biomet hip replacement devices. Stryker hip replacement lawyers who have handled cases like these will have the experience and financial backing to take on a big medical device manufacturer.

Ask your potential lawyer about their experience obtaining settlements and jury verdicts against big corporations. An experienced attorney can explain the process, guide you through litigation and help fight for your settlement or jury verdict.