Stryker Hip Replacement Lawsuits

As of June 2025, there were two different multidistrict litigations addressing concerns over Stryker hip replacements, according to data from our review of the most recent MDL Statistics Report.

Each MDL focuses on specific Stryker hip replacement devices, but injuries named in cases are similar and plaintiffs claim they’re the result of design defects within the Stryker models.

MDL number 2768 is before U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani in Massachusetts. There were 138 pending cases as of June 2025 and the MDL addresses LFIT Anatomic CoCR V40 femoral head defects.

MDL number 2441 is before Senior Judge Donovan W. Frank in Minnesota. There were 51 pending cases out of an original 3,637 cases, and the MDL addresses Rejuvenate and ABG II hip implant defects.

Based on our legal research, which included reviewing court documents and talking to our legal partners, we’ve compiled a timeline of key developments in this litigation below.

Even though Stryker offered $2 billion to settle these claims, the MDLs remain open. A few cases continue to transfer into these MDLs, and lawyers are still taking Stryker cases.

People are filing Stryker Tritanium Acetabular Shell hip replacement lawsuits because they claim the devices are defective and shells may loosen and lead to early failure. Loosening may lead to pain, soft tissue damage, bone loss and revision surgery.

In one of the earliest studies cited in lawsuits, doctors at NYU Langone Orthopedic Hospital provided case studies of five patients who experienced failures of Stryker’s Tritanium cup devices implanted between 2011 and 2016.

These doctors published their findings in Arthroplasty Today. According to the findings, imaging showed loose Tritanium components were damaging the soft tissue surrounding the joint. All five patients underwent revision surgery to correct the issues caused by the devices.

You may qualify to file a Stryker hip implant lawsuit if you received a Stryker Tritanium Acetabular Cup, LFIT V40, Rejuvenate, ABG II, Accolade, Citation or Meridian implant and suffered complications that led to revision surgery.

You may also qualify if you need to have revision surgery, but your doctor can’t perform surgery because of potential complications. This is only an overview of potential qualifications, and you should talk to a lawyer about your specific case. Only a lawyer can tell you if you qualify to file a hip lawsuit against Stryker.

Hundreds of people filed LFIT V40 Femoral Head lawsuits after Stryker recalled 42,519 LFIT V40 devices in 2016, citing “higher than expected” complication rates.

One of those claimants was Mern Direnzo, who received the LFIT Anatomic V40 Femoral Head in 2009.

Blood tests showed high levels of metal ions in her blood and urine after the procedure, and Direnzo underwent revision surgery to remove the implant. Direnzo filed a Stryker hip implant lawsuit in 2014.

In November 2018, Stryker and lawyers for plaintiffs suing the company over damages caused by its LFIT V40 Femoral Head device announced an initial settlement agreement. Federal court documents confirm that the agreement included lawsuits combined in a New Jersey multicounty litigation, but the settlement terms are confidential.

People filed Rejuvenate and ABG II lawsuits after Stryker issued a 2012 Field Safety Notice indicating that its Rejuvenate and ABG II models had a high rate of adverse local tissue reaction caused by inflammation in the tissue near the implant.

The neck components of the Rejuvenate and ABG II models are composed of chromium and cobalt, and the stems have a titanium coating. When the metal parts rub against each other where the neck meets the stem, they can shed metallic debris into the body.

Metal ions released into the surrounding tissue can cause inflammation and prompt an immunological response, leading to metallosis, tissue and bone death, and pain. People with a metal sensitivity may experience a severe allergic reaction.

In many of these cases, patients required revision surgery. In July 2012, Stryker issued a recall for the two models of hip replacement devices. Stryker also offered to reimburse patients for testing, treatment, revision surgery and other expenses connected to hip replacement health complications from the recalled models.

A Stryker hip replacement lawyer can help you file your case, fight for you in court and negotiate a settlement on your behalf. The most important qualification to look for in a hip lawsuit attorney is experience with similar hip implant cases.

For example, Drugwatch partners with the award-winning law firm Weitz & Luxenberg. The firm’s lead lawyer on Stryker cases, Ellen Relkin, helped negotiate the last Stryker settlements totaling about $2 billion. She has many years of experience litigating medical device lawsuits.

Stryker hip implant lawsuits are complex litigations that require a legal team with experience handling defective medical device cases. Sometimes, you might not know what type of hip implant you have, and a lawyer can help you find out that information.

“We’re happy to take a look at medical records, take a look at the product itself and see if you had one of those defective products,” said Daniel Nigh, a mass torts and product liability lawyer. 

Ask your potential lawyer about their experience obtaining settlements and jury verdicts against big corporations. An experienced attorney can explain the process, guide you through litigation and help fight for your settlement or jury verdict.