In a recent development in the Stryker Rejuvenate metal hip implant litigation, a federal judge has called for all Stryker Rejuvenate plaintiffs who have undergone revision surgery to file a “notice of revision surgery” with the Court. U.S. District Judge Donovan Frank stated that if any metal hip implant plaintiffs had been forced to undergo revision surgery due to their hip implant complications, then it should be noted in the litigation.

In a pretrial order issued April 17, 2015, Judge Frank issued the order requiring all relevant Stryker metal hip claimants to file the notice of revision within 45 days of filing their lawsuits. The notice must contain the basic details of the revision surgery, and will be deemed an amendment to the plaintiff’s initial proceedings.

A number of plaintiffs have filed Stryker Rejuvenate lawsuits, and the hip implant lawsuits were consolidated before Judge Frank in the District of Minnesota in order to coordinate discovery and pretrial proceedings. Centralizing numerous similar lawsuits reduces the chances of duplicate discovery, avoids conflicting rulings from different judges, and ultimately makes the litigation process more convenient for the parties. Each of the metal hip implant lawsuits alleges that the patients suffered a variety of complications such as device failure, infection, corrosion, and metallosis.

Although the manufacturer of the Stryker Rejuvenate reached a global settlement last year to resolve cases where plaintiffs underwent revision surgery before November 2, 2014, some patients reportedly continue to suffer painful adverse effects that require revision surgery. Legal experts predict that Stryker will continue to face serious litigation over the Rejuvenate and ABG II metal hip implants because thousands of patients still have the dangerous metal-on-metal devices implanted in their bodies.

Overview of Metal Hip Implant Complications

The metal-on-metal hip implant complications mentioned in lawsuit included device failure, infection, corrosion, the formation of pseudotumors, debilitating pain, and metallosis. Each of these complications stems from the basic problem that the devices are completely composed of metals, with the ball-and-socket joints being the biggest problem. When these parts interact, metal ions are shed into the bloodstream, resulting in a wide variety of complications.

Metallosis is a particular concern. Metallosis, or blood-metal poisoning, occurs when metal levels in the blood are elevated so high that it can cause damage to internal organs or basic biological functions. Additionally, corrosion of the device naturally leads to the tissue in the surrounding area becoming infected, which causes debilitating pain and ultimately device failure. The pain associated with these devices is often so paralyzing that the patient’s mobility is severely restricted.

In order to correct these problems, patients must often undergo revision surgery. The surgery completely removes the metal hip implants, oftentimes replacing them with a different hip implant. Many medical experts state that revision surgery is much more complicated and risky than the initial implant procedure.

The FDA approved metal-on-metal hip implants under a policy that allowed the devices to go to market without thorough testing. Many experts believe that many metal hip implant injuries could have been avoided if metal-on-metal hip implants had been approved through the traditional and more rigorous process.