Even though Stryker issued a voluntary recall of its two latest hip implant systems, the ABGII and Rejuvenate Modular Neck Hip Stems in 2012, lawsuits against the company because of serious errors continue to mount. The 2012 recall was the latest in a series of hip implant recalls over significant health problems for those with the implants.
Voluntary Recall Came 3 Months After Release of “Safety Notice”
It took 3 months for Stryker Corp to initiate their recall after sending out an “Urgent Field Safety Notice” to officials in hospitals who were responsible for managing risk, as well as implant surgeons. It seems that the company had already become aware that their two latest products, the ABGII and Rejuvenate Modular neck hip systems had shown signs of corrosion after being fitted. More serious signs had also been apparent, showing that the metal components were responsible for small shards being released and transported around the recipient’s body, causing bone and tissue inflammation and death.
Previous Recalls of Stryker Products
A similar problem with a previous implant system had caused the company to initiate recalls in 2009, 2011 and 2013 for the Accolade TMZF system. The problem then, and now, was with the titanium alloy hips. After being surgically installed, these hips may fret or corrode when used with cobalt and chromium femoral heads.
By the time the 2012 recalls had taken place and the two implant systems had been withdrawn from circulation, recipients were already complaining of severe pain in the implant area. Lawsuits are piling up with plaintiffs seeking compensation for the pain caused by the implants, loss of earnings, the cost of revision surgery, and other implant related damages.
How To File A Stryker Hip Implant Lawsuit
Branko Obradovic was just one of thousands of Stryker hip implant victims who filed suit against the company because of negative implant related health effects. He reports that the implant failed not long after the implant surgery took place. He was forced to undergo revision surgery within 15 months of the problems surfacing. According to Obradovic, his movement is very painful and he can hardly get out of his car without it being “an ordeal”. Obradovic is extremely angry about the Stryker implant and told reporters who interviewed him that the company, one of the world’s largest medical and orthopedic suppliers, “should have known what they were putting in people’s bodies.”
Another individual lawsuit was filed by a Deerfield Beach resident who didn’t notice any real problems for several years after her initial implant surgery in 2010. However, as time passed, she began to experience pain. Her surgeon did a number of tests to find out whether the implant was failing, and after discovering symptoms of metallosis, removed the implant in a revision surgery. The surgeon noticed inflammation of the tissue that had been adjacent to the cobalt and chromium components, revealing a significant amount of metallosis had taken place.
Seeking recovery from Stryker requires skill and resources. Stryker is a publicly traded company valued in excess of 42 billion dollars. These companies fight aggressively in their attempts to place profits over patient safety. The Dixon Injury Firm, recognized as Top 100 Trial Lawyers and Lifetime Members of the Million Dollar Advocates Forum, has the experience required to hold Stryker responsible for placing consumers at risk. Call today for a FREE consultation with our Stryker legal team. (855) 552-2337.
Latest posts by Christopher Dixon (see all)
- Third Jury Awards More Than $70 Million in Talcum Powder Case - October 28, 2016
- Johnson & Johnson’s Link To Ovarian Cancer - June 24, 2016
- Stryker Hip Implant Lawsuits Are Not Over Yet - June 3, 2016