A new DePuy hip replacement lawsuit has been filed in U.S. District Court in Dallas, Texas on Dec. 19, 2017. The DePuy hip replacement lawsuit concerns the failure of the DePuy Pinnacle hip replacement system implanted in the plaintiff on May 24, 2006.

The plaintiff, Flora A., resides in the town of Homosassa, Florida.

The named defendants in this DePuy hip replacement lawsuit are DePuy Orthopedics Inc., DePuy Inc., Johnson and Johnson Inc., and Johnson and Johnson International Inc.

Flora, the complainant in this DePuy hip replacement lawsuit, underwent right total hip arthroscopy in Tampa, Florida on May 24, 2006 at St. Joseph Hospital.

The surgeon used, in consultation with the patient, a DePuy Pinnacle acetabular cup and metal liner. This combination of prosthetics was highly promoted as safe, effective and durable at the time of Flora’s surgical procedure, she claims.

According to the narrative of this DePuy hip replacement lawsuit, Flora required explantation of this DePuy Pinnacle hip replacement system on Feb. 5, 2014.

This explantation occurred within eight years of the original total hip replacement due to complete failure, well under the expected time line of functionality for the prosthetic. The patient’s original orthopedic surgeon oversaw this risky and painful process as well.

Flora claims the Pinnacle hip system failed allegedly due to the metal-on-metal articulation of the metal liner and metal femoral head involved in the prosthetic. This combination has been showed to promote metallosis—toxic levels of chromium or cobalt in the blood, tissue death or necrosis around the joint, and metal debris build-up near the hip leading to pseudotumors, pain, and swelling.

The History of the DePuy Pinnacle Hip Replacement System

The defendant, DePuy Orthopedics, Inc., attempted to get pre-market approval from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) under the 510(k) program for the DePuy ASR XL hip replacement system in 2005.

The 510(k) program is essentially a loophole where a medical device can be approved for market based on similarities with an item already commercially available without the usual requisite safety and clinical trials.

With this application, DePuy relied upon the Pinnacle metal acetabular cup as a similar, already-marketed device. Five years after approval under the 510(k) process, however, DePuy Orthopedics recalled its ASR XL hip replacement system which had allegedly injured thousands of hip surgery patients due to its manufacturing and design defects.

Despite this action and the fact that the original ‘similar’ device was the Pinnacle prostheses, no action was taken to recall the latter.

The plaintiff, Flora A., is bringing the following actions against the named defendants: negligence, strict products liability—manufacturing defect, design defects, inadequate warning, failure to conform to representations, failure to adequately test, breach of express warranty, breach of implied warranty of merchantability, fraudulent concealment, intentional misrepresentation, and negligent misrepresentation.

The plaintiff is asking for a trial by jury and a compensatory award over $75,000, as well as compensation for pain and suffering, loss of consortium, mental anguish, assistance, and affection.

Flora hopes for punitive damages to be assessed against the defendants and to have court and attorney fees returned to herself.

The DePuy Pinnacle Hip Replacement Lawsuit is Case No.  3:17-cv-03445-K in U.S. District Court, Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division.