A man from Utah alleges he had to undergo Stryker revision hip surgery after he suffered serious device complications from the company’s metal on metal hip replacement system.

The claimant is just one of many patients alleging Stryker revision hip surgery was necessary due to the defective nature of the company’s metal on metal hip replacement, which has lead to growing multidistrict litigation (MDL).

Plaintiff Ronald S. states he had to undergo Stryker revision hip surgery after he developed painful side effects that interfered with his everyday life. Like many other patients, Ronald was recommended the Stryker Rejuvenate hip implant to restore hip function after his joints became damaged.

The Stryker Rejuvenate was marketed as a safe and reliable hip replacement system, with its warning label allegedly failing to mention the possibility of devastating complications. Ronald says he had the Stryker Rejuvenate implanted on his left side on March 7, 2012 and suffered no initial complications.

However, due to painful side effects, he says he had to undergo Stryker revision hip surgery on Dec. 14, 2018 and had the metal on metal hip replacement system explanted.

In addition to the painful symptoms he suffered, Ronald also says he now tests positive for excessive levels of chromium and cobalt in his blood. This means Ronald was most likely suffering from the effects of metallosis, or blood metal poisoning, which can quickly compound the patient’s health if not treated.

Overview of Metal on Metal Hip Implant Complications

Metallosis is a condition that has become widely associated with metal on metal hip implants. The condition occurs when the ball and socket joints interacting and shed metal ions in the blood.

Other problems often leading to Stryker revision hip surgery include:

• debilitating pain
• limited range of motion
• infection
• inflammation
• corrosion
• fretting
• formation of pseudotumors
• tissue death

It is important to note that revision surgery is considered riskier than the initial implant surgery, due to a higher risk of infection. Ronald opted to file legal action, after discovering other patients had also suffered serious metal on metal hip implant complications.

The Stryker metal hip lawsuit alleges the company either knew or should have known about the allegedly defective nature of the Rejuvenate system, due to the fact that certain models of it were recalled in 2012.

The Stryker Rejuvenate and ABG II metal on metal hip replacement systems were recalled due to reports of the devices corroding and fretting, and that numerous patients had developed joint infections and required revision surgeries.

Even though these metal on metal hip implant complications can be devastating to patients, Stryker allegedly failed to disclose this information to the public.

Ronald’s lawsuit is joining MDL No. 2441, where it will stand alongside other claims also alleging patients needing to undergo Stryker revision hip surgery. By joining an MDL, Ronald’s claim will be streamlined through the litigation process and will avoid potential problems like conflicting rulings from different judges.

Ronald is seeking a multitude of damages, including counts of negligence and failure to warn.

Ronald’s Stryker Lawsuit is Case No. 0:18-cv-03456-DWF-BRT, in the U.S. District Court of Minnesota.