Andrew Sullo,
Managing Partner of Sullo & Sullo, LLP, plans to attend a meeting held in
Chicago on May 30, 2013, at which time oral arguments regarding a motion to
consolidate Stryker Rejuvenate hip implant lawsuits will be heard. The motion
filed in February, 2013, seeks to consolidate federal lawsuits against Stryker
Orthopedics for alleged harm done to patients by the company’s Rejuvenate and
ABG II hip implants. Multi-county and multi-district lawsuits are used to
better manage similar cases; resources are conserved when a single court
handles all discovery and pre-trial proceedings.
Plaintiffs
can have their cases heard in a timely manner when case consolidation takes
place and it is generally felt that more consistent rulings result from
multi-district and multi-county case consolidation. Further, an already
overburdened court system is generally saved both time and financial resources.
Over thirty Stryker Rejuvenate cases are currently pending throughout at least
a dozen Minnesota district courts, therefore the consolidation of these
lawsuits makes sense. Robert Davis, a plaintiff in the Stryker cases filed the
consolidation motion, requesting that litigation against Stryker for the harm
suffered by recipients of the Rejuvenate be transferred to a U.S. District
Court in the District of Minnesota.
Both the
Rejuvenate and ABG II were marketed in 2009 after gaining FDA approval. At that
time metal-on-metal hip devices had come under scrutiny for the tiny metal ions
which were released when the cobalt and chromium parts rubbed against one
another. Those metal shards had been found to wreak havoc in the body, causing
inflammation, pain, bone loss, tissue degradation and total hip failure as well
as metal toxicity. The Rejuvenate and ABG II were believed to be a viable
alternative to the all-metal implants as their modular pieces made them
extremely customizable. Surgeons could choose the individual parts which
comprised the hip implant device in order to custom fit the implant to the
patient, taking into account the patient’s size as well as normal activity
levels.
Within a very
short period of time, however, recipients of the Rejuvenate and ABG II were
sending reports of adverse health effects from the hip devices. In April of
2012, prior to the recall in July, an Urgent Field Safety Notice was released
by Stryker warning physicians and hospitals of the risk of corrosion, fretting
and metallosis from the implants. When corrosion occurs, tiny metal shards from
the metal neck juncture or the metal trunnions on either
end of the stem could lodge in the hip tissues or enter the bloodstream of the
patient. Should the device fail or the metal toxicity progress to a serious
level, revision surgery could be the only option.
The success
rate for Rejuvenate and ABG II revision surgery is considerably less than for
the original surgery and is considered both risky and complex. The stem of the
Rejuvenate is embedded deeply within the femur, therefore when removal is
necessary the stem must be literally dug out of the bone. In some cases the
femur can shatter leaving nothing to attach the new implant to. Recovery times
can be from six weeks to two months, resulting in lost wages as well as astronomical
medical expenses.
As many as
53,000 Stryker recalled Rejuvenate and ABG II hip implants were sold and it is
believed that the majority of those devices were implanted in patients. Stryker
issued a follow-up statement in January, 2013, which warned recipients of these
recalled implants to undergo regular testing even if they had not yet
experienced any adverse health effects from the device. Although there are
relatively few lawsuits filed as of this date, it is believed the numbers will
increase significantly within the coming year. Following the recall the number
of adverse health effects reported to the FDA has substantially increased as
more and more recipients of the devices are suffering from the device.
