Stryker Corporation is facing a growing multidistrict litigation (MDL) consisting of product liability claims alleging problems with the Stryker hip replacement system.

One of the most recent claims to join the litigation was filed by a couple from South Carolina, alleging the claimant had suffered serious device complications soon after the Stryker hip replacement system was implanted.

Plaintiff May H. and husband John H. filed their Stryker metal hip lawsuit together, alleging the Stryker hip replacement system has permanently impacted their quality of life and marriage.

Like many other patients, Mary had the Stryker hip replacement system implanted to help restore hip function that had been damaged by deteriorated joints.

It is important to note that the Stryker hip replacement system is a metal on metal hip prosthetic that is marketed to be more durable and longer lasting than plastic or ceramic models. With these and other benefits in mind, Mary says she agreed to have the Stryker hip replacement system implanted and underwent the surgery on July 1, 2014.

During this procedure, the LFIT V40 femoral head and Stryker Restoration femoral stem were implanted and served as Mary’s artificial hip joints on her right side.

While Mary reportedly suffered no initial device complications, this changed not long after the Stryker hip replacement system was implanted and began interacting with her body.

Overview of Stryker Hip Replacement System Problems

Similar to many other patients who opted for a metal on metal hip replacement system, Mary says she developed metallosis or blood metal poisoning. This complication is allegedly caused by the metal ions that are shed into the bloodstream from the all metal ball and socket joints interacting.

This metal on metal rubbing can lead to a multitude of other complications that can ultimately lead to device failure including, but not limited to:

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

These complications often make it impossible for patients to move or live a normal life, with revision surgery often being the only viable treatment option. It is important to note that revision surgery is considered riskier than the initial implant surgery due to higher risk of infection.

The Stryker hip replacement system and other metal on metal hip prosthetics were marketed to be overtly superior to other hip implants, but have allegedly compounded the health problems of numerous patients.

Even though metal hip implant complications can be devastating to patients, plaintiffs like Mary and John say Stryker allegedly failed to disclose this information to the general public. Mary states she would not have agreed to have the Stryker hip replacement system implanted, if she knew the potential device complications.

Mary and John’s Stryker metal hip lawsuit is joining MDL No. 2768, where it will stand alongside other claims alleging similar problems with the Stryker hip replacement system.

By joining an MDL, Mary and John’s claim will be streamlined through the litigation system and will avoid potential problems like conflicting rulings from different judges. Mary and John are seeking a multitude of damages in their Stryker metal hip lawsuit, including counts of negligence and failure to warn.

This Stryker Hip Replacement Lawsuit is Case No. 1:18-cv-11591-IT, in the U.S. District Court of Massachusetts.