Stryker Corporation is facing a growing multidistrict litigation (MDL), consisting of claims alleging serious injuries from their Stryker LFIT hip implant. One of the most recent product liability claims comes from a Tennessee woman, alleging the Stryker LFIT hip implant had compounded her medical condition and caused her to need revision surgery.

Plaintiff Phyllis K. had opted for the Stryker LFIT hip implant after discussing the option with her physician and reviewing the company’s marketing materials. Phyllis had the Stryker LFIT hip implant implemented on Feb. 10, 2010 on her right hip and then had the same hip replacement system implanted on her left hip in July 2011.

Not long after implantation, Phyllis reportedly began experiencing discomfort in her hip implant areas. According to diagnostic testing, Phyllis had experienced device loosening, infection and corrosion of the implant area, and malposition.

In addition, further diagnostic testing had revealed that Phyllis had developed metallosis, or blood metal poisoning. These hip system complications eventually forced Phyllis to undergo revision surgery to explant the alleged defective metal on metal hip implant.

Overview of Stryker LFIT Hip Implant Complications

Phyllis opted to file legal action against the company not long after her revision surgery, after learning of the Stryker LFIT hip implant’s allegedly defective nature in August 2016. She had reviewed side effects on the internet, and had also learned that Stryker had recalled metal hip implants with V40 head components.

These head components connect to the Accolade TMZF hip stems, which simulate hip function and movement. However, the Stryker LFIT hip implant and other metal on metal hip replacement systems may cause serious difficulties due to the interaction between the ball and socket components.

When these metal hip components rub together, metal ions can shed into the bloodstream and quickly compound into serious device complications including:

• Device Component Disassociation
• Corrosion
• Fretting
• Debilitating Pain
• Limited Motion Range
• Tissue Infection and Death
• Metallosis

These complications often force patients to undergo revision surgery to remove and replace the alleged defective hip replacement systems, and to restore the patient’s movement. These revision surgeries, however, are considered riskier than the initial implant procedure. This is due to an increased risk of complications from another surgery.

Stryker Corporation had recalled certain lots and sizes of Stryker LFIT hip implant systems with V40 heads, after receiving a surprisingly large number of device failure reports.

This is not the first time the company has faced allegations of producing defective metal hip implants, with the company previously recalling ABG II metal hip implants. Stryker has faced serious legal repercussions for these metal hip implant issues, with patients alleging the company either knew or should have known about potential metal hip implant complications.

Phyllis is having her Stryker metal hip implant lawsuit join MDL No. 2768, where it will stand alongside other claims alleging similar injuries. Phyllis states she never would have opted for the Stryker LFIT hip implant if she had known about its high device failure rate.

This Stryker Metal Hip Implant Lawsuit is Case No. 3:17-cv-01183, in the U.S. District Court of Middle Tennessee.