A new Optetrak Exactech knee lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on Feb. 1, 2018. The plaintiff, Alfonso S., is a citizen and resident of Philadelphia who brings his Exactech knee lawsuit against Florida company Exactech Inc.

According to the plaintiff’s account in the Exactech knee lawsuit, Alfonso S. required a left knee arthroplasty, and an Optetrak knee prosthetic unit was implanted.

Shortly after surgical implantation, the plaintiff alleges he began to experience inflammation and chronic pain associated with the device.

Eventually, the knee became so painful that he had to undergo knee revision surgery to replace the implant. During the left knee revision surgery, the plaintiff alleges that orthopedic surgeons found evidence of prosthetic component loosening and movement from the original position which had caused uneven wear and tear and ambulatory instability.

The Optetrak Knee Prosthetic

The Optetrak knee was introduced commercially in 1994. Since that time, according to the documentation in the Exactech knee lawsuit, there have been several Optetrak components and devices that were deemed “substantially equivalent” under the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s 510(k) program and were able to enter the marketplace without undergoing rigorous testing.

These products include: Optetrak Finned Tibial Tray, Optetrak Offset Tibial Tray, Optetrak Hi-Flex PS, and Optetrak Logic.

The FDA continues to receive reports about recipients needing early revision surgery after experiencing complications from the Optetrak knee prosthetic, according to Alfonso’s complaint. Complaints and evidence from revision surgeries suggest wear at the polyethylene insert could be linked to loosening where the tibial plate inserts into the lower leg bone and is cemented.

A study of over a hundred Optetrak knee prosthetic recipients revealed that about a quarter of the study participants suffered from this tibial implant loosening. Another quarter of the study participants experienced chronic pain and inflammation and found themselves needing to take painkilling medications on a regular basis.

To date, the Exactech company has continued to deny liability for the problems associated with the Optetrak. There has been no recall issued.

In his Exactech knee lawsuit, the plaintiff brings the following causes of action:

First Cause of Action: Negligence; Second Cause of Action: Manufacturing Defect; Third Cause of Action: Negligent Misrepresentation; Fourth Cause of Action: Punitive Damages.

The plaintiff is asking that his Exactech knee lawsuit be tried by a jury. He hopes for a favorable judgment in which he is awarded compensatory, consequential, and general damages over and above jurisdictional limits.

Alfonso S. requests a reimbursement of all medical, hospital, and incidental care costs for his injuries along with a return of all associated attorney and court costs. Finally, he hopes for the assessment of punitive damages against Exactech to discourage future marketing of ill-designed medical devices.

The Exactech Knee Lawsuit is Case No. 2:18-cv-00480-PBT in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

Get a Free Knee Replacement Case Review

If you or a loved one suffered from complications caused by an Attune knee implant, an Arthrex knee implant, or an Exactech knee implant, you may have a legal claim. In general, knee replacement surgery lawsuits are filed individually by each plaintiff and are not class actions. Get help now by filling out the form on this page for a FREE case evaluation.

Learn More