Cartiva Implant Failure Lawsuit Overview

Since 2016, the Cartiva toe implants have been promoted as an alternative to big toe fusion surgery and hailed by the manufacturer as a revolutionary toe implant designed to provide pain relief for individuals suffering from degraded cartilage in the big toe joint.

However, only a few years it was introduced, toe implant patients began reporting high rates of Cartiva surgery complications, including severe toe pain, loosening, fracture and subsidence, which is where the implant slips into the bone.

As a result, individuals across the U.S. are now pursuing Cartiva lawsuits against the manufacturer, claiming a defective design makes the toe implant prone to fail and cause severe pain, often resulting in the need for additional surgery and long-term disability.

Who May Be Eligible for a Cartiva Implant Lawsuit Payout?

Financial compensation may be available through a Cartiva implant failure lawsuit settlement for individuals who who received a failed Cartiva implant and experienced any of the following complications:

• Implant Failure/Fracture
• Subsidence (implant sinks into the bone)
• Toe Fusion Surgery
• Replacement Surgery
• Revision Surgery

Cartiva implant lawyers are reviewing lawsuits on a contingency fee basis, which means that there are no fees or expenses paid unless a Cartiva settlement or lawsuit payout is received.

2026 Cartiva Implant Lawsuit Update

• March 9, 2026 Update: A lawsuit was filed by Illinois resident Daniel Catanese in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois against Cartiva, Inc., alleging injuries caused by a defective Cartiva synthetic cartilage implant used to treat arthritis in his big toe. The complaint claims the device, implanted in 2017, later failed and migrated, causing severe pain, bone damage, and loss of mobility. As a result, Catanese underwent multiple procedures, including surgery to remove the implant in 2024 and additional corrective surgery in 2025 to repair the damage to his toe joint.
• February 19, 2026 Update: Federal judges have centralized all Cartiva synthetic cartilage implant lawsuits into a multidistrict litigation in the Eastern District of Arkansas before U.S. District Judge Kristine G. Baker. The consolidation will coordinate discovery and pretrial proceedings for claims that the recalled big toe implant was defectively designed and prone to premature failure. The MDL is expected to streamline litigation as additional Cartiva implant injury lawsuits continue to be filed nationwide.
• February 5, 2026 Update: A new Cartiva lawsuit alleges the toe implant loosened and degraded after implantation, leaving the patient with worsening pain and instability in the great toe joint. According to the complaint, the failure ultimately required corrective treatment after the device no longer functioned as intended.
• January 27, 2026 Update: A new Cartiva lawsuit alleges that a failed SCI toe implant forced a patient to undergo big toe fusion surgery after the device deteriorated and caused chronic pain. The filing adds to growing claims that the Cartiva implant breaks down prematurely, leaving patients with limited treatment options and permanent joint damage.
• January 1, 2026 Update: Plaintiffs asked the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation to consolidate Cartiva toe implant lawsuits into a federal MDL, citing common allegations that the device failed prematurely and caused chronic pain. The request seeks centralized handling of discovery and pretrial proceedings as similar claims continue to be filed nationwide.

Cartiva Implant Background and FDA Approval

Approximately 2.2 million people in the U.S. suffer from conditions known as hallux limitus or hallux rigidus, which are forms of degenerative arthritis in the first joint of the big toe, known as the first metatarsophalangeal joint. The conditions cause the cartilage in that joint to degrade, which can result in severe pain and limited range of motion in the big toe.

Prior to Cartiva, the only treatment option was to remove the deteriorated big toe joint and fuse the toe bones together, a procedure known as big toe fusion or arthrodesis.

The Cartiva Synthetic Cartilage Implant was introduced in 2015, as an alternative to arthrodesis, involving a cylindrical implant made of polyvinyl alcohol-based hydrogel (PVA) designed to provide a gel-like cushioning to replace the degraded cartilage in the big toe joint. The implant was promoted as a revolutionary alternative to patients facing big toe fusion surgery, and was advertised by the manufacturer as safe and effective.

The Cartiva implant first received initial FDA approval in 2016, based on the results of the clinical trial known as the “Motion” study. The Motion study claimed that the Cartiva toe implant was “substantially equivalent” to the existing fusion surgery technique in treating patients with damaged or deteriorated cartilage in the first metatarsophalangeal joint. The study also claimed there was only a 13.5% Cartiva implant failure rate.

Real-world patient outcomes have demonstrated much higher Cartiva toe implant failure rates, with patients reporting alarming rates of complications, which have included severe toe pain, loosening, fracturing and subsidence, which is when the implant sinks into the bone.

Why Does The Cartiva Implant Fail?

Medical experts have offered several theories on why the Cartiva implant fails. Some of the most compelling arguments made for why the implant fails have included:

• Improperly Textured – Experts have suggested the round smooth surface of the device on all surrounding sides may allow the device to move. This can result in implant loosening that causes joint failure.
• Cartiva Implant Shrinking– Studies have indicated the water-based Cartiva implant may shrink once implanted due to the lack of hydration. This may allow the implant to loosen and slip into the bone (subsidence).
• Bone Weakening Around The Implant – Experts have also theorized that the implant was not designed properly to withstand the surrounding bone being weakened by arthritis, the condition in which Cartiva was designed to treat. The lack of supporting bone combined with the improperly textured or shrinking device could allow the implant to loosen and slip into the bone.

Manufacturers Withheld Information on Cartiva Implant Failures

In several Cartiva implant failure lawsuits that have been filed to date, individuals have raised allegations against Cartiva Inc., Wright Medical Group and Stryker, claiming the manufacturers have withheld information for years about the increasing number of Cartiva implant failures, in an attempt to avoid a Cartiva recall and increase profits.

Lawsuits have claimed each of the manufacturers, that either currently own Cartiva (Stryker), or previously owned Cartiva since 2016 (Cartiva Inc. and Wright Medical Group), were aware of higher failure rates than the 13% failure rate disclosed to patients.

Plaintiff’s have argued that the medical device company had exclusive knowledge of the potential Cartiva defects, citing more than 144 adverse event reports regarding loss of toe mobility, pain and high failure rates filed with the FDA. In addition to the FDA reports, multiple studies have been published outlining the increasing rate of implant failures and complications.

However, rather than the manufacturers fulfilling their legal obligations to report the increasing rate of Cartiva implant failures and complications to the FDA, and warning the public, the medical device companies chose to take no action to protect patients.

Was the Cartiva Implant Recalled?

Yes. A Cartiva implant recall was issue by Stryker on October 31, 2024 after new postmarketing data revealed a higher rate of implant failure among Cartiva recipients than clinical trials initially reported.

The Cartiva recall included a warning outlining several documented hazards associated with the use of Cartiva, stating the device has been linked to higher rates of:

“Revision, removal, implant subsidence, displacement, pain, nerve damage or fragmentation. Cartiva SCI devices have been observed in some cases to be revised/removed at higher rates than previously observed in the initial Cartiva SCI premarket and post-approval studies.”

Cartiva Implant Failure and Complication Studies

Several follow-up studies and case reports have never been able to duplicate the results of the Cartiva Motion clinical trial. In fact, research published in medical journals have suggested Cartiva implant failure rates may be upward of 6 times higher than the manufacturer previously reported.

Examples of Cartiva Toe Implant Lawsuits

February 2023: Cartiva Toe Implant Medical Malpractice Lawsuit. Eugene Perez filed a Cartiva toe implant lawsuit against the medical providers who recommended the use of a Cartiva implant for his big toe pain caused by a condition known as hallux rigidus. Perez claims the medical providers breached their standard of care by recommending a Cartiva implant since the device contains a flawed design, is prone to failure, and was not appropriate for treating his condition.

October 2022: Cartiva Lawsuit Over Failure Two Years After Toe Implant Surgery Cathy Atkinson filed a lawsuit against Cartiva manufacturers in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, claiming she received a defectively designed Cartiva implant that failed, resulting in the need for additional surgeries. Atkinson received a Cartiva implant in November 2018, which failed only two years later, requiring Cartiva removal surgery in December 2020 and the need for arthrodesis fusion surgery in 2021.

Have a Cartiva Implant Lawyer Review Your Case

If you or a loved one received a Cartiva toe implant and experienced complications resulting in the need for revision surgery, replacement surgery or big toe fusion, submit information about your potential claim for review by a Cartiva lawyer to determine whether a settlement or lawsuit payout may be available.

Lawyers provide free claim evaluations and consultations. There are no fees or expenses unless a recovery is obtained in your case.