Stryker Hip Replacement Lawsuits

Stryker agreed to a confidential LFIT V40 Femoral Head settlement in 2018. It paid $2 billion in 2014 to settle Rejuvenate and ABG II hip lawsuits. Attorneys are now investigating issues with its Tritanium Acetabular Shells.

This is an active lawsuit

See If You Qualify for a Hip Replacement Lawsuit

If you experienced serious complications from your hip replacement device, you may be entitled to compensation. Get a free case review.

  • A+BBB Rating
  • 4.9 StarGoogle Reviews

Get Your Free Case Review

We value your privacy. By clicking REVIEW MY CASE, you agree to our privacy policy and disclaimer. After submitting, you will be contacted by one or more of Drugwatch's trusted legal partners (including autodialed and prerecorded calls or text/SMS messages). Msg. and data rates apply. Your consent to text messaging is not required for a case review and you may opt out of text messages at any time by texting STOP. This is legal advertising.

  • A+BBB Rating
  • 4.9 StarGoogle Reviews
Last Modified: February 1, 2024
Fact Checked
Legally Reviewed

Drugwatch.com content is legally reviewed for accuracy and quality.

Examples of trusted legal reviewers include qualified mass torts lawyers and certified paralegals.

Drugwatch.com writers gather lawsuit information by studying court records, watching lawsuit proceedings and speaking with experienced attorneys.

Why Trust DrugWatch?

Drugwatch.com has been empowering patients for more than a decade

Drugwatch.com has provided reliable, trusted information about medications, medical devices and general health since 2008. We’ve also connected thousands of people injured by drugs and medical devices with top-ranked national law firms to take action against negligent corporations.

Our team includes experienced medical writers, award-winning journalists, researchers and certified medical and legal experts. Drugwatch.com is HONCode (Health On the Net Foundation) certified. This means the high-quality information we provide comes from credible sources, such as peer-reviewed medical journals and expert interviews.

The information on Drugwatch.com has been medically and legally reviewed by more than 30 expert contributors, including doctors, pharmacists, lawyers, patient advocates and other health care professionals. Our writers are members of professional associations, including American Medical Writers Association, American Bar Association, The Alliance of Professional Health Advocates and International Society for Medical Publication Professionals.

About Drugwatch.com

  • Assisting patients and their families since 2008.
  • Helped more than 12,000 people find legal help.
  • A+ rating from the Better Business Bureau.
  • 5-star reviewed medical and legal information site.
Learn More About Us

Testimonials

"Drugwatch opened my eyes to the realities of big pharmacy. Having a family member with major depression and anxiety, I was looking for information on her medications. I found information that was very helpful, that her psychiatrist never told her."
Marianne Zahren Patient’s Family Member
  • Google Business Rating
  • BBB A+ Rating Logo

Stryker Hip Replacement Lawsuit Updates

As of February 2024, there were two different multidistrict litigations with a group of consolidated lawsuits addressing concerns over Stryker hip replacements. 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 264 pending cases as of February 2024 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 72 pending cases out of an original 3,635 cases and the MDL addresses Rejuvenate and ABG II hip implant defects.

Stryker Lawsuit Updates
  • February 2024: Lawyers are still taking individual cases and litigation continues in Tritanium Acetabular Shell lawsuits.
  • July 2023: Cases that have been settled continue to be dismissed from MDLs.
  • June 2022: Judge Donovan Frank set a deadline of Sept. 9, 2022, for attorneys to update the Court on any outstanding cases in the confidential Settlement Program in MDL 2441.
  • May 2022: Several cases were dismissed with prejudice from MDL 2441 because plaintiffs were included in settlement negotiations.
  • June 2021: Judge Donovan Frank postponed discovery in the cases until January 2022 because of the 2020 Settlement Program in MDL 2441.

Stryker hip replacement device MDLs 2768 and 2441 are no longer accepting cases, and the company reached settlements with most claimants in 2014. Individuals may still file personal injury suits for injuries sustained through either the LFIT Anatomic CoCR V40 femoral head or the Rejuvenate and ABG II devices.

Why Are Tritanium Acetabular Shell Lawsuits Being Filed?

After surgery to implant Stryker Tritanium Acetabular Shell hip replacement devices, many people reported loosening of the shells of the cups of the device. Loosening can occur because the cement holding the metal components together or the metal components themselves wear out through regular joint movement.

A 2018 study found that these changes to the device could lead to “poorer clinical function” within one year and recommended doctors monitor these patients.

Loosening can cause hip and groin pain, and some patients need revision surgery. Revision surgery is a major procedure and has associated risks, such as infection.

Infections after hip replacement surgery can be dangerous. They can occur years after surgery and may develop deep within the tissue surrounding the implant, sometimes leading to repeated hospital stays.

Stryker hip implant

Doctors at NYU Langone Orthopedic Hospital studied five patients who experienced failures of Stryker’s Tritanium cup devices implanted between 2011 and 2016.

These doctors said imaging showed loose Tritanium components were damaging the soft tissue surrounding the joint. All five patients underwent surgery to correct the issues caused by the devices.

Injuries Named in LFIT V40 Femoral Head Lawsuits

Stryker recalled 42,519 LFIT V40 devices in 2016, citing “higher than expected” complication rates, prompting hundreds of people to file lawsuits. 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.

See if You Qualify for a Lawsuit Our Partners

Our Trusted Legal Partners

Drugwatch partners with trusted law firms to help you take legal action. After submitting the form, one of Drugwatch's partners will contact you for a free case review.

simmons hanly conroy law firm logo weitz and luxenberg logo sokolove law firm logo levin papantonio rafferty law firm logo nigh goldenberg raso and vaughn law firm logo morgan & morgan logo the ferraro law firm logo meirowitz & wasserberg law firm logo

Why Rejuvenate and ABG II Lawsuits Were Filed

In 2012, Stryker issued a 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.

Chromium and cobalt compose the neck components of the Rejuvenate and ABG II models, 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.

The 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.

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

How to Choose a Stryker Hip Replacement Lawyer

When choosing a Stryker hip replacement lawyer, the most important thing to look for is experience with similar hip implant cases. Stryker hip implant lawsuits are complex litigations that require a legal team with experience handling defective medical device cases.

Some examples of other defective implant lawsuits include the DePuy ASR and Biomet hip replacement devices. Stryker hip replacement lawyers who have handled cases like these will have the experience and financial backing to take on a big medical device manufacturer.

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.

Please seek the advice of a medical professional before making health care decisions.