A man from Georgia recently filed a Stryker metal hip lawsuit alleging he had to undergo revision surgery due to device complications. This Stryker metal hip lawsuit is joining a multidistrict litigation (MDL), where it will stand alongside other claims alleging similar metal-on-metal hip implant complications.

Plaintiff James D. opted to file this Stryker metal hip lawsuit after discovering the allegedly defective nature of the all-metal hip components, claiming Stryker Corporation failed to warn the public against these complications.

Like millions of other patients needing to undergo hip replacement surgery, James says he was encouraged to to choose the prosthetic with the V40 Femoral Head and Accolade TMZF Stem metal hip implant components. Stryker Corporation marketed this device to be a good choice, and he says it seemed like it would help him regain an active lifestyle.

With these benefits in mind, James opted to have the prosthetic implanted. According to the Stryker metal hip lawsuit, the metal-on-metal hip implant surgery occurred on Feb. 16, 2009 and reportedly had no initial complications.

However at some point after the surgery, James reportedly began suffering complications related to the metal-on-metal hip implant components.

Overview of Stryker Metal Hip Implant Complications

Often, the all-metal ball and socket joint components in many hip implants may shed metal ions into the bloodstream. This can lead to metallosis, or blood metal poisoning, which can quickly cause the deterioration of surrounding tissue.

Not only does this condition make basic movement tremendously painful, metallosis often leads to serious complications that can only be resolved through revision surgery including:

• Fretting
• Corrosion
• Tissue death
• Inflammation
• Formation of pseudotumors

Due to suffering one or more of these side effects, James had to undergo revision surgery to explant the V40 Femoral Head on May 8, 2012.

James opted to file this Stryker metal hip lawsuit soon after learning that the company recently issued a voluntary recall of their LFIT V40 Femoral Heads. The recall was reportedly made after Stryker received numerous complaints of premature device failure and suffered serious complications that required revision surgery.

It is important to note that this is not the first time Stryker Corporation has faced scrutiny for its metal-on-metal hip implants, with the company having conducted an earlier market recall of their ABG II and Rejuvenate devices in 2012.

The company’s ABG II and Rejuvenate devices were prone to causing metallosis and requiring patients to undergo revision surgery. Even though these metal hip implant complications can be potentially devastating to patients, Stryker Corporation allegedly failed to warn the public against them.

James states he would not have agreed to have the device implanted, had he known about the prosthetic’s allegedly defective nature. James’ Stryker metal hip lawsuit is being filed in MDL No. 2768, where it will be streamlined through the litigation process.

By joining an MDL, James’ claim will avoid potential problems like conflicting rulings from different judges. James is seeking multiple damages in his Stryker metal hip lawsuit, including multiple counts of negligence and failure to warn.

This Stryker Metal Hip Lawsuit is Case No. 1:18-cv-10807, in the U.S. District Court of Massachusetts.