How Broadspire May Influence the Stryker Recall Lawsuits

Just like DePuy and Johnson & Johnson before them, it appears that Stryker may be bringing in Broadspire Services—a third-party risk-management company—to assist with the lawsuits being brought against Stryker following the recall of the ABGII andRejuvenate hip implant systems. It is likely that when worried patients pick up the phone to call Stryker in order to determine their options they will be referred to Broadspire. It’s very important that recipients of the defective ABGII and Rejuvenate be aware that by signing anything Broadspire recommends they could be putting their future at risk by signing away very important legal rights. Therefore, all patients whose lives have been diminished due to the recalled Stryker hip implants should ensure they have discussed their specific situation with an attorney before they reach out to Stryker or Broadspire.

The Stryker ABGII and Rejuvenate Recall

The ABGII and Rejuvenate hip implants were recalled in June, 2012, due to the potential of fretting and corrosion. This fretting or corrosion can lead to heavy metal poisoning when the friction causes metal ions to shear away, finding their way into surrounding tissue or into the bloodstream. When the ions burrow into the hip tissues, inflammation and pain can result. The longer metal ions are released, the more serious the problem in the hip joint. Tissue destruction and death can occur as well as bone loss and while bone loss can be addressed by doctors, tissue loss cannot. In fact, an orthopedic surgeon who practices at the Mayo Clinic in Jacksonville, FL states that “…if the muscle is dead because it has been poisoned by metal ions, we can’t recreate it.” The metal ions which enter into the bloodstream can cause an array of negative health issues including:

·         Gastrointestinal disorders

·         Cardiovascular events

·         Renal and thyroid problems

·         Vision and hearing impairment

·         Disruption of DNA

·         Fatigue

·         Depression

·         Anxiety

·         Loss of memory

·         Chronic headaches

·         Vertigo

·         Skin problems

·         Pseudo-tumors which require surgery

Johnson & Johnson’s History with Broadspire

DePuy and its parent company Johnson & Johnson were under the same rash of lawsuits and problems following the recall of their ASR hip implant in 2010. They quickly brought Broadspire on board to manage patient questions and claims. A large number of DePuy patients received a letter known as the “Broadspire letter” which, in essence, offered to cover the medical expenses related to revision surgery. In return, DePuy implant recipients were required to sign a medical release form which allowed Broadspire—on behalf of DePuy and Johnson & Johnson—to gain access to the patient’s sensitive medical records. While on the surface the offer of help seemed generous, in reality once the patient’s medical records were obtained those records were sometimes used to potentially deny revision surgery, claiming the problems were due to other medical issues suffered by the implant recipients.

Signing the Broadspire letter also, in some cases, waived the patient’s right to future legal claims. Many implant recipients who had not yet experienced problems with their ASR signed the letter, effectively giving up their right to sue in the future should they develop problems later on. Lawyers who are assisting those patients whose lives have been irrevocably altered due to adverse health effects relating to the Stryker Rejuvenate or ABGII implant are extremely concerned that patients may do the same thing when presented with a letter similar to the DePuy Broadspire letters.

Paying Patients for Revision Surgery is Simply Not Enough

Patients who have experienced a failed Stryker hip implant are likely well aware of the far-reaching consequences. Not only will they be required to undergo an even riskier surgical procedure than the original implant, they are also facing a substantially increased recovery time. Most of those who have undergone revision surgery are off work from six to eight weeks. Few people work for an employer who is understanding enough to pay them their regular salary while they are recuperating from revision surgery meaning the normal monthly bills could well go unpaid.

Because many of the Rejuvenate and ABGII recipients were younger and involved in active lives and careers, the necessity of revision surgery could cause significant problems. Aside from the necessity for revision surgery, the buildup of metal ions in the bloodstream may have caused damage which, in some cases, is irreversible. In other words, for those Stryker patients whose lives were forever changed by an ABGII or Rejuvenate hip implant, an offer to pay for revision surgery hardly seems adequate.

The Promise of All-Metal Hip Implants

When the metal-on-metal hip implant came onto the scene it quickly began replacing polyethylene and ceramic implants for one simple reason: the all-metal hip implants were marketed as lasting much longer than the other commonly used implants—from fifteen years to even twenty. Because the typical life of a polyethylene or ceramic implant is approximately 8-10 years, this seemed like a dream come true for those facing implant surgery.

Yet once thousands of hip implant recipients across the globe were implanted with all-metal hip implants, more and more of those recipients began reporting adverse health effects. It soon became well-known that the metal parts rubbed against one another during times of activity, creating friction which in turn sheared away metal ions which were released into the body. The scores of all-metal hip implant recipients who had been promised a safe, worry-free hip implant quickly found the failure rate for the all-metal implants could even be as high as 40-60% after 3-5 years.

Expected Payout Increased in Light of Increasing Number of Stryker Lawsuits

Like DePuy, Stryker may do their best to place the blame for the failed implants anywhere but on themselves. Claiming the revision surgeries are due to other health issues or mal-positioning of the implant seems to be status quo for manufacturers of metal-on-metal hip implants once the lawsuits begin rolling in. Stryker announced in January they would be increasing their forecasted costs to cover patient testing, treatment, revision surgeries, lawsuits and insurance payments to between $190 and $390 million dollars. Because Broadspire is now in the Stryker lawsuit picture, lawyers familiar with the cases believe Broadspire may attempt to manage costs the same way they did with DePuy, gaining access to the sensitive medical histories of implant recipients.