The Stryker Rejuvenate and ABGII were recalled in July, 2012, after a significant number of implant recipients developed serious medical problems from the hip device. Stryker changed the design of these two models substantially; rather than using a cobalt and chromium ball, they used a ceramic ball and instead of a single modularity device the company designed a dual modularity device which offered surgeons many more options when placing the implant. With a variety of component sizes, surgeons were able to custom fit each hip implant device to the patient’s body size and type as well as to their level of activity.

Across the United States, including Tennessee, there are many recipients of a Stryker Rejuvenate or ABGII hip implant who have suffered serious health issues following implantation. These two Stryker models gained FDA approval in 2008 and 2009, yet shortly thereafter the FDA began receiving adverse reports from consumers. By April, 2012 enough problems had been reported that Stryker issued an urgent field safety citing the two hip implants were more likely to suffer fretting and corrosion which in turn could lead to metal toxicity or hip implant failure. Shortly thereafter the recall was issued. It is believed there were approximately 20,000 of the ABGII and Rejuvenate implants sold prior to the recall and that the majority of those were implanted into patients. Although the United States does not have a comprehensive database of medical devices, each doctor and hospital does keep records of which device was implanted into each individual patient.

With all the controversy surrounding all-metal hip implants, recipients of these implants may well ask—“How do I know if I have a Stryker hip?” The Stryker ABGII and Rejuvenate hip implants were recalled in July of 2012 after gaining FDA approval in 2008 and 2009. Other metal-on-metal hip implants have been recalled as well however there are many models which are still being implanted in patients

Victoza gained FDA approval in 2010, for the treatment of Type 2 diabetes, yet only a short time later, adverse reports began coming in to the FDA. Victoza is manufactured by a Danish company, Novo Nordisk; the company was required to conduct a five-year study to determine the risks of pancreatitis, hypoglycemia, serious allergic reactions, pancreatic cancer and thyroid cancer among Victoza patients. Victoza was also approved with the understanding that it would be a second-line defense drug which means it would only be prescribed when other drug treatment was unsuccessful. 

Many of those who have taken the Type 2 diabetic drug, Victoza, may be wondering whether they are entitled to file a Victoza lawsuit to recover expenses related to adverse health symptoms developed after starting the drug. Victoza, manufactured by Novo Nordisk, gained FDA approval in 2010, although there were two FDA pharmacologists and one FDA Clinical Safety Reviewer who were opposed to approving the drug until further studies had been done. This March, a Drug Safety Communication was sent out to alert the public to a potential risk of Victoza in the development of pancreatitis, pancreatic cancer and thyroid cancer.