Lawsuits Over Stryker Rejuvenate Hip Explants Continue to Be Filed As Devices Fail

Following a global Stryker Rejuvenate settlement reached last year to resolve more than 4,000 cases for over $1 billion, the manufacturer continues to face new lawsuits being filed on behalf of individuals who continue to experience problems with the recalled hip replacement resulting in the need for revision surgery.

Following a July 2012 recall, thousands of Stryker Rejuvenate hip lawsuits were filed by individuals who received the modular implant and experienced catastrophic failures that result in the need for the device to be explanted.

Last year, a settlement was reached to resolve all cases where plaintiffs underwent revision surgery on or before November 2, 2014. However, several hundred additional claims have been brought since the settlement, and the manufacturer will likely have to continue dealing with lawsuits over Stryker Rejuvenate explants for years to come.

Unlike traditional hip replacements, the Stryker Rejuvenate features a modular femoral stem, where two pieces fit inside each other to allow the surgeon to adjust the length to match the patient’s anatomy. However, amid higher-than-expected failure rates associated with metallic debris released as the metal parts rub against each other, Stryker recalled the implant and a related design, the ABG II.

There were more than 20,000 of Stryker Rejuvenate and ABG II implants sold before the problems were discovered, and it is expected that more and more implants will continue to fail as the devices remain in place.

So far, about 5,000 complaints have been filed, with most of the litigation centralized in a federal MDL or in New Jersey state court.

Stryker Rejuvenate Settlement Agreement

Under terms of the settlement announced in November 2014, individuals who qualified are expected to receive a base payment of $300,000, with several factors that may reduce the base award, including the plaintiff’s age, prior hip revision surgeries and other related health conditions. In addition, individuals who suffered catastrophic injuries will be able to pursue additional compensation under the settlement if they meet several eligibility requirements for “enhancements.”

Only claims involving hips that failed prior to the settlement will qualify under that agreement, but it is expected that additional settlements will be reached, as cases continue to be filed on behalf of individuals who have recently had a Stryker Rejuvenate explant surgery.

In one complaint (PDF) filed on February 8, Linda Miles indicates that she received a Stryker Rejuvenate hip in March 2012, only months before the recall. However, she did not undergo explant surgery until January 2015, so her claim does not qualify under terms of the November settlement.

In another complaint (PDF) filed on February 6, Dana Miller indicates that she received a Stryker Rejuvenate hip in November 2011. Only weeks after the settlement was announced, Miller has the Rejuvenate hip explanted in December 2014.

Additional claims are expected in the coming months, as hip replacement lawyers continue review and file cases for individuals who had the recalled hip implanted and are now experiencing problems.