A motion filed recently seeks to consolidate all federal product liability lawsuits concerning the recalled Stryker Rejuvenate and ABG II hip implants. Lawsuits involving large numbers of affected people are sometimes consolidated into an MDL in order to better manage the cases; one court handles all discovery and pretrial proceedings, conserving resources and encouraging consistent rulings between lawsuits with similar legal issues. While saving time and money on the part of an overburdened court system is one goal of an MDL, allowing individuals who have been harmed by a defective product or drug to have their lawsuit heard in a timely manner is equally important.
Regarding the Stryker Rejuvenate cases, over thirty pending cases are currently spread across a dozen District Courts in Minnesota, making an MDL consolidation a smart move. An attorney on behalf of Robert Davis, a plaintiff in the Stryker cases, filed the motion to consolidate on February 12, 2013. Davis is requesting that litigation for the Rejuvenate be transferred to a U.S. District Court in the District of Minnesota as at least ten Stryker Rejuvenate lawsuits are pending in this area.
Complaints against Stryker center around problems experienced from the Rejuvenate or ABG II—both of which were recalled in July of 2012 only four years following FDA approval. Both the Rejuvenate and the ABG II hip implant devices were expected to offer considerable benefits over the metal-on-metal hip implant devices—such as the DePuy ASR—which have been riddled with problems and lawsuits. Because Stryker’s two recalled implants were constructed with only a metal neck juncture and metal trunnions on either end of the stem, it was believed they would not cause metal toxicity in the same way as the all-metal hip implants.
The two Stryker hip implants featured a modular design; parts of the implant fit inside one another, allowing surgeons to tailor the length of the components to the individual patient’s size and overall activity level. Unfortunately, adverse reports began coming in to the FDA from patients who had received a Rejuvenate or ABG II, and, in April of 2012, Stryker issued an Urgent Safety Alert to physicians and hospitals. This alert noted the potential of the Rejuvenate and ABG II to suffer corrosion and fretting at the neck juncture. When corrosion occurs, tiny metal ions can shear away from the implant and become lodged in surrounding hip tissue or enter into the bloodstream. Inflammation and pain can result as well as tissue degradation and bone loss.
Should the metal ions build up in the bloodstream, symptoms of metal toxicity can occur including neurological, gastrointestinal, cardiovascular, renal and thyroid issues, loss of vision and hearing, DNA disruption, irritability, depression, anxiety, memory loss and vertigo. It is estimated that over 50,000 of the Stryker recalled implants were sold prior to the recall, most of which had already been implanted in patients. A follow-up statement was issued by Stryker officials including specific recommendations for recipients of the Rejuvenate or ABG II.
Stryker noted that all recipients of the recalled devices should undergo regular testing even if no problems had yet been experienced. While the number of lawsuits filed at this time is relatively small, it is believed that the numbers will increase dramatically as time passes. In fact, since the recall last July, the number of adverse health effects reported to the FDA has increased significantly. The New Jersey State Court System—Bergen County, specifically—has already seen a multi-county litigation for Stryker Rejuvenate lawsuits. Because New Jersey is the home state of the manufacturer of these hip implants, it is expected that an even larger number of complaints will be filed in that state. It is unlikely that oral arguments regarding the motion at hand in Minnesota will be heard prior to an upcoming hearing session scheduled in Chicago on May 30, 2013. Andrew Sullo, managing partner of Sullo & Sullo, LLP, expects to be in attendance at that May meeting.