Stryker Corporation is facing a growing multidistrict litigation (MDL), consisting of product liability claims alleging serious Stryker LFIT complications that forced many patients to undergo revision surgery.

One of the most recent claims to join the litigation was recently filed by a couple from Georgia, alleging the husband had suffered serious Stryker LFIT complications that compounded his medical condition.

Plaintiffs James and Hallie T. allege the company either knew or should have known about the severity of Stryker LFIT complications, but failed to warn the general public.

Stryker LFIT Metal Hip

Like millions of orthopedic patients, James needed to undergo hip replacement surgery and was presented the Stryker LFIT system as a viable option.

Stryker had reportedly supplied James and his physicians with marketing materials that assured their metal on metal hip replacement system was high quality, safe to use, and made no mention potentially serious Stryker LFIT complications. With these benefits in mind, James says he agreed to have the hip replacement system implanted.

According to the Stryker metal hip lawsuit, James underwent the implant surgery on Dec. 9, 2009, and had the LFIT Anatomic CoCr V40 Femoral Head and Accolade TMZF Stem implanted on his right hip. While James was initially able to contend with the metal on metal hip implant, he reportedly began experiencing Stryker LFIT complications.

James eventually underwent revision surgery on Nov. 13, 2017, in which the LFIT V40 femoral head was removed. According to the Stryker metal hip lawsuit, James had developed a number of serious Stryker LFIT complications including metallosis, or blood metal poisoning.

Overview of Stryker LFIT Complications

Metallosis can be caused when the all metal ball and socket joints of the hip component interact. This rubbing may cause metal ions to be shed into the bloodstream. A number of other health complications can also develop from implant issues  including, but not limited to:

• Fretting
• Corrosion
• Infection
• Tissue Death
• Debilitating Pain
• Limited Range of Motion

These Stryker LFIT complications are often so debilitating and painful that patients are often forced to undergo revision surgery, which is considered riskier than the initial procedure due to a higher risk of infection.

James alleges that even though he was assured the Stryker LFIT hip replacement system was a safe and reliable product, he experienced a number of these Stryker LFIT complications. He opted to file legal action after learning the Stryker Corporation had recently recalled certain Stryker LFIT femoral heads from the market due to reports of taper lock failure and related complications.

It is important to note that this not Stryker’s first experience with metal on metal hip implant complications, having previously recalled their ABG II and Rejuvenate systems years earlier in 2012.

Even though these Stryker LFIT complications can be devastating, patients claim the company allegedly failed to disclose this information to the medical community and patient population in a timely manner.

James states that he would not have agreed to have the metal on metal hip replacement system implanted if he had known about the potential Stryker LFIT complications. James and Hallie’s Stryker metal hip lawsuit is joining MDL No. 2768, where it will stand alongside other claims alleging similar Stryker LFIT complications.

This Stryker Metal Hip Lawsuit is Case No. 1:18-cv-11492-IT, in the U.S. District Court of Massachusetts.