September 18, 2011

Hip Replacement Implant Complaints on the Rise

Hip Replacement Implant Complaints on the Rise
By Holly Soehnge

Hip replacement is a common orthopedic surgical procedure performed to relieve pain and restore mobility to a damaged hip joint, typically for patients with arthritis or a hip injury. Diseased or damaged portions of the hip ball and socket joint are replaced by prostheses made of metal, ceramic, plastic, or combinations of these materials. Metal-on-metal (MoM) hip replacement implants use ball and socket components that are both made of cobalt or chromium metal, or titanium. The ball fits into and glides against the surface of the socket to imitate the function of the hip joint.

Hip replacement surgery is mostly successful, and hip implants are made to last 15 or more years before replacement is required. There are risks of several complications that can occur, however; as with any type of surgery. Complications that can occur include infection, dislocation of the ball implant from the socket, and implant loosening or other wear and tear over time requiring another hip replacement surgery.

In contrast to the pain relief and durability characteristic of hip replacement treatments, recently there has been a remarkable surge in complaints of early failures of metal-on-metal hip replacements within a few years of surgery. Some patients have experienced severe ongoing pain, swelling, and difficulty walking. Others have suffered damage or death to the soft tissue surrounding the hip joint. Many of these implant failures require the patient to undergo painful and expensive revision surgery.

Metal-on-metal hip implants wear over time, resulting in deposits of metal debris in the tissues surrounding the hip joint. A chiseling effect known as edge-loading can occur when the ball of the implant presses on the socket edge as a result of poor implant design or faulty surgical technique. Large amounts of metal debris are deposited in the tissues as a result, which can lead to high levels of cobalt and chromium ions in the patient’s bloodstream, possibly leading to metal poisoning. Studies to date have not shown a greater risk of cancer or other adverse effects from the metal ions, although additional data from ongoing studies is needed before the long-term effects are known.

Current research estimates that 1 to 3 percent of patients could experience an inflammatory reaction to the metal debris, causing chronic pain, damage and death to hip tissues, and bone loss. Women appear to be affected more frequently than men. A recent Harvard Medical School study looked at the effects of edge-loading from metal hip implants. The research showed an association between resulting high cobalt and chromium blood levels and patient susceptibility to soft tissue pseudotumors. Pseudotumors are a rare complication, but nevertheless a very serious problem, causing tissue destruction and the need for revision surgery. Metal debris complications are a significant safety concern and the focus of ongoing studies.

Concerned for their patients’ safety, most orthopedic surgeons have stopped using metal-on-metal hip implants. Metal-on-metal hip implants were used in about one third of the 250,000 hip replacements performed in the United States until the past two years, when use of the implants has dropped to only about 5 percent of the market.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has received over 5,000 reports of adverse events in connection with metal-on-metal hip implants since January 2011, according to a study by the New York Times. In response to the complaints, the FDA is encouraging patients who have received metal-on-metal hip replacements to contact their surgeons immediately if they experience problems, and to participate in safety surveillance studies.

The FDA has required 21 manufacturers of metal-on-metal hip implants to submit plans to conduct post-marketing surveillance studies to address safety issues related to the implants. Among these manufacturers are DePuy, a division of Johnson & Johnson, Zimmer Holdings, Wright Medical, and Biomet. The FDA has until November 2011 to decide whether the proposed plans are adequate to address safety concerns.

Of the metal-on-metal complaints received by the FDA this year, about 75 percent relate to complications with the DePuy ASR hip replacement systems. Depuy has attributed the failure of the devices to implant loosening, infection, bone fracture, dislocation, metal debris reactions, and accompanying pain. Some orthopedic surgery experts have said they believe these devices have a design flaw that makes them difficult to implant properly. DePuy refuted these statements, but announced last year that it was discontinuing the ASR systems because of declining demand.

In August 2010, Depuy voluntarily recalled its two ASR systems as a result of new data from the National Joint Registry of England and Wales showing that roughly 1 in 8 ASR patients would experience implant failure within 5 years, an unacceptably high failure rate. There have been over 90,000 DePuy metal hip implants sold; so that according to the data, over 11,000 patients are likely to experience implant failures that require painful and expensive revision surgery.

The two DePuy systems under recall are the ASR XL Acetabular System, a metal cup and ball replacing the hip joint, and the ASR Hip Resurfacing System, a metal cap that fastens onto the head of the femur. Only the ASR XL Acetabular System is FDA-approved for use in the US. Depuy has encouraged surgeons having implanted these devices to request patient evaluations and metal sensitivity testing, since not all patients with metal debris-related tissue damage would necessarily show symptoms. Depuy has stated that it will cover the costs of patient monitoring and treatment, including revision surgery costs.

DePuy is facing criticism from orthopedic experts that it should have recalled the devices much sooner considering the large number of complaints. The first of many lawsuits filed against DePuy claims the devices are defective and alleges that DePuy knew about problems with the implants early on, but did nothing to alert patients or surgeons.

Metal hip implants made by Zimmer Holdings branded “Durom” are also coming under increased scrutiny for potentially causing high blood levels of chromium and cobalt and soft tissue damage from metal debris. Studies at the University of British Columbia found that patients implanted with a Durom socket implant had 2.6 times or 10 times higher than normal blood levels of chromium and cobalt, respectively. The researchers recommended that Durom implants no longer be used in standard implants because of the metal ion levels.

The rise in the incidence of severe medical complications from metal-on-metal hip implants is a rapidly growing concern for patients and orthopedic surgeons. It is difficult to know the full extent of the problem; the use of the latest metal-on-metal devices is still relatively new, and it is estimated that only one to ten percent of all complications from medical devices are actually reported to the FDA. More information is needed from ongoing studies to determine to what extent metal debris represents a threat to patient health, and whether implants made by some manufacturers are more or less safe than others.

June 28, 2011

What Does the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s Letter to Hip Makers Mean?

The U.S. FDA ordered 21 manufacturers to collect information from patients.

The U.S. FDA ordered 21 manufacturers to collect information from patients in a recent letter to hip manufacturers. Click here for report. The three-page letter demands blood tests and other studies within thirty days. Here is a summary of the information and questions the FDA is requiring from manufacturers:

  • The harmful events observed in patients with Metal-on-Metal (MoM) total hip replacement (THR) systems.
  • The levels of serum and chromium in patients prior to THR.
  • The patient population's average levels of chromium and serum in the blood for a minimum of eight years after the implant (patient population is the demographics and other particulars of a particular population).
  • Do the average levels of chromium and serum in the blood increase during the first eight years (or the length of time on the market)?
  • Reasons for revision (alteration of a medical device) and patient population's average levels of chromium and serum in the blood at the time of the revision.
  • The number of patients with pain and biological and psychological symptoms associated with the THR.
  • The quantity of harmful reaction of body tissues in patients who did not have a revision.
  • How differences in revisions vary over time after the initial implant?
  • What demographics have higher metal ion concentrations in their blood?
  • What demographics have higher risks of needing revisions?
  • What causes the THRs to fail?

Will New FDA Orders Lead to a Recall of All Metal-on-Metal Hip Implants?

U.S. Food and Drug Administration orders 21 hip makers to blood test their patients for metal.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the governmental organization that protects public health, entered the battlefield with the Johnson & Johnson's DePuy recall and ordered 21 manufacturers to collect information from patients - including blood tests for metallic ions. This broad use of the agency's authority will clarify failure rates of metal-on-metal implants and drop the hammer on Johnson & Johnson.

"This is a disaster for J&J," said James Moriarty, senior partner at Moriarty Leyendecker. "It will be a public health nightmare and show how metal-on-metal hip implants can cause metallosis." (the swelling around metal implants as a result of corrosion or an allergic reaction).

What could this mean for Johnson & Johnson and the healthcare industry?

- New data could magnify the defects of the recalled DePuy ASR.

- Will create an apples-to-apples study for the DePuy ASR to be compared to other devices.

- Will cause pandemonium in hospitals as all metal-on-metal hip patients rush to test for metal in their blood.

- Send lawyers, lawsuits and patients swarming after irresponsible hip manufacturers.

- Cause the recall of the DePuy's Pinnacle Acetabular device, another device that is repeatedly failing with hip patients.

In 2010 doctors implanted a nurse with the DePuy ASR Pinnacle device. After the procedure, the patient complained, "The pain in groin is worst when I lift left leg 45, 60 and 90 degree, it feels like a click/catch and the pain is worst at those points. I am a registered nurse and have taken care of pts [patients] with hip replacements, this is not normal recovery. Something is wrong with this device." These complaints are typical of patients suffering from metallosis after hip implant surgery.

The risk of metal-on-metal devices is that metal may enter a patient's bloodstreams after the procedure as tiny particles wear off the device and enter the space around the implant. The FDA stated its concerns in a February 2011 report, "Concerns about Metal-on-Metal Hip Implant Systems" The report spotlights the uncertainty of the device's failure rates - hence the need for more studies.

New information must be submitted to the FDA within 30 days and could lead to a recall of all metal-on-metal hip replacement devices. It's the first battle in the war on metal-on-metal hip makers that could destroy Johnson & Johnson and DePuy.

May 19, 2011

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s Letter to Hip Makers Mean

What Does the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s Letter to Hip Makers Mean?

Home |Personal Injury |DePuy Hip Recall |Traffic Tickets |Family Law |Criminal Defense |Get Informed

The U.S. FDA ordered 21 manufacturers to collect information from patients.

The U.S. FDA ordered 21 manufacturers to collect information from patients in a recent letter to hip manufacturers. Click here for report. The three-page letter demands blood tests and other studies within thirty days. Here is a summary of the information and questions the FDA is requiring from manufacturers:

  • The harmful events observed in patients with Metal-on-Metal (MoM) total hip replacement (THR) systems.
  • The levels of serum and chromium in patients prior to THR.
  • The patient population's average levels of chromium and serum in the blood for a minimum of eight years after the implant (patient population is the demographics and other particulars of a particular population).
  • Do the average levels of chromium and serum in the blood increase during the first eight years (or the length of time on the market)?
  • Reasons for revision (alteration of a medical device) and patient population's average levels of chromium and serum in the blood at the time of the revision.
  • The number of patients with pain and biological and psychological symptoms associated with the THR.
  • The quantity of harmful reaction of body tissues in patients who did not have a revision.
  • How differences in revisions vary over time after the initial implant?
  • What demographics have higher metal ion concentrations in their blood?
  • What demographics have higher risks of needing revisions?
  • What causes the THRs to fail?

April 15, 2011

TV Ads Promote Consumer Requests For Expensive, Often Inappropriate Hip Devices

Gary Schwitzer writes on his blog “Health News Review” that he was “jolted” by a television commercial he saw recently for an artificial hip joint sold by medical device-maker Smith & Nephew.

The ad features athletic, fit, male body forms engaged in all sorts of strenuous pursuits; playing soccer, surfing, rock climbing up a craggy peak (!). The figures are rendered as stylized silhouettes but if I had to guess, I’d say they were designed with highly active men, age 40 to 50, in mind. Triatheletes and Ironmen wouldn’t be a stretch. Read more about this post>>

February 10, 2011

Johnson & Johnson Accused of Concealing Ortho Evra Risks

By Megan Breckenridge, Staff Writer

SULLO & SULLO, LLP

Home |Personal Injury |DePuy Hip Recall |Traffic Tickets |Family Law |Criminal Defense |Get Informed

HOUSTON — Millions of women across the country rejoiced in 2002 when a new, convenient alternative to daily oral contraceptive pills hit the market.

Ortho Evra, a hormone-containing patch, was praised by public health experts and consumers alike because it eliminates one of the major barriers to perfect birth control use: Remembering to take a daily pill. The patch can be placed on the arm, back or abdomen—anywhere it adheres well and won’t be damaged—and needs only to be changed once a week. Since it’s introduction, over 40 million prescriptions for Ortho Evra have been written, and TIME Magazine named it one of the best inventions of 2002.

But in 2005, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) warned that women using Ortho Evra were exposed to approximately 60 percent more estrogen than those who use oral contraceptive pills. It is believed that the difference in exposure is related to the delivery mechanism of the birth control patch. Hormones in birth control pills are partially diluted by the digestive system, while those in the patch are absorbed directly into the patient’s blood stream. The latter causes a higher concentration of medication, specifically estrogen, to enter a patient’s body, increasing the risks of pulmonary embolism—a specific type of blood clot—as well as stroke and heart attack.

The first fatality publicly blamed on Ortho Evra occurred in April 2005, when a Manhattan fashion student collapsed in a New York City subway station. An autopsy found that a blood clot had moved into the victim’s lung, which the medical examiner ruled a side effect of the birth control patch.

By November of 2005, the FDA had received 21 reports of life-threatening blood clots and other ailments associated with Ortho Evra. But it wasn’t until 2006, when a study was published that confirmed women using the patch were twice as likely to suffer from venous thromboembolisms (VTEs) as those taking oral birth control pills, that the FDA requested that the Ortho Evra label be changed to include a stronger safety warning.

According to an NBC news report, broadcast September 22, 2010, leaked patient reports from Johnson & Johnson show that the company knew users of the patch were 12 times more likely to suffer stroke and 18 times more likely to have blood clots than Pill takers. Further, NBC revealed, a vice president of research at Johnson & Johnson, Dr. Patrick Caubel, quit over frustration that the company ignored his data showing elevated levels of complications and mortality associated with the patch.

Another former vice president, Dr. Joel Lippman, claimed in a lawsuit that he was fired by Johnson & Johnson because he expressed concerns about the patch’s dangerously high estrogen levels prior to its coming to market. The company, he says, “disregarded his concerns and launched the product anyway.”

According to NBC, 24 deaths have been attributed to blood clots induced by the patch, and more than 2,400 women currently have personal injury lawsuits filed against Johnson & Johnson. To date, the company has spent $68 million to quietly settle Ortho Evra lawsuits.

Unfortunately, Ortho Evra remains on the market, despite countless calls to have it pulled. In spite of its risks, the patch is still a big money maker for Johnson & Johnson, which has earned $1.6 billion on its sales.

In response to NBC’s news report, the company issued the following statement:

Thank you for your inquiry to Ortho Women’s Health & Urology, Division of Ortho-McNeil-Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. We believe it is inappropriate to comment on the details around ongoing litigation and therefore are not providing responses to your individual questions beyond the statement below:

ORTHO EVRA has been a safe and effective birth control option for women and their healthcare providers since 2002. It addresses a birth control need and provides another choice for women who, with the counseling of their healthcare provider, do not want or are unable to take a birth control pill every day. Ortho Women’s Health & Urology has regularly disclosed scientific data regarding ORTHO EVRA to the FDA, the medical community and the public in a timely manner, and when used according to the FDA-approved label, ORTHO EVRA remains a safe and effective method of hormonal birth control. It also, like all methods of hormonal birth control, has benefits and risks which, as a prescription medicine, should be the subject of discussion between a woman and her healthcare provider. These benefits, risks and other important safety information are contained in the Detailed Patient Labeling, which is part of the ORTHO EVRA® Prescribing Information, and can be found at http://www.orthoevra.com/sites/default/files/assets/OrthoEvraPI_0.pdf.”

— Jeff Christensen, spokesperson, Johnson & Johnson

If you or someone you know were injured while using Ortho Evra, please contact the experienced team at Sullo & Sullo, LLP. We will aggressively represent women who have suffered heart attacks, strokes, blood clots and other serious injuries while using this drug. Call us at 713.839.9026 or visit our website at www.sullolaw.com for a free legal consultation today.