DePuy Hip Measuring Error Results in Wrongly-Fitted Implants: Report

Thousands of DePuy metal-on-metal hip implants sold in the U.K. may not fit patients correctly, due to measuring problems during the manufacturing process. 

According to a report by the Telegragh, documents from the medical device manufacturer indicate that a problem with a metal liner used in the Depuy Pinnacle and ASR hip replacement systems may have led to thousands of the poorly fitting implants before the problem was corrected.

The report indicates that DePuy knew about the hip measuring error at its Leeds manufacturing facility as early as 2008. A company spokesperson told the paper that the company investigated the issue, removed the equipment, and concluded there were no safety issues.

"*" indicates required fields

"*" indicates required fields

While the initial documents were linked to the Ultamet, a liner used in the Pinnacle, another document indicated that manufacturing problems also affected the DePuy ASR series of implants, which were subsequently recalled worldwide in 2010, due to a high rate of failures. It is unclear when DePuy corrected the problem.

The DePuy ASR design features a metal femoral head that rotates within a metal acetabular cup, resulting in the release of metallic debris as the parts rub against each other during normal daily activities. This debris may cause individuals with a DePuy ASR hip to suffer metal blood poisoning, known has hip metallosis, with can lead to the loosening and ultimate failure of the artificial hip.

While original estimates suggested that about one out of every eight recalled DePuy ASR hips may fail within five years, subsequent data suggests that the failure rate may be substantially higher the longer the implants remain in place.

More than 12,000 DePuy ASR hip lawsuits were filed in the U.S. before a multi-billion dollar settlement reached in 2013 by the manufacturer.

The manufacturer also faces thousands of DePuy Pinnacle hip implant lawsuits in the United States, which are centralized in the Northern District of Texas before U.S. District Judge Ed Kinkeade to reduce duplicative discovery into common issues in the cases, avoid conflicting rulings from different courts and to serve the convenience of the parties, witnesses and the courts.

As a small group of cases are being prepared for bellwether trials in the MDL, which are designed to help the parties gauge how juries may respond to certain evidence and testimony that is likely to be repeated throughout the litigation, new cases continue to be filed on behalf of people who have experienced problems with the metal-on-metal implant.

Written by: Irvin Jackson

Senior Legal Journalist & Contributing Editor

Irvin Jackson is a senior investigative reporter at AboutLawsuits.com with more than 30 years of experience covering mass tort litigation, environmental policy, and consumer safety. He previously served as Associate Editor at Inside the EPA and contributes original reporting on product liability lawsuits, regulatory failures, and nationwide litigation trends.




0 Comments


This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Share Your Comments

This field is hidden when viewing the form
I authorize the above comments be posted on this page
Post Comment
Weekly Digest Opt-In

Want your comments reviewed by a lawyer?

To have an attorney review your comments and contact you about a potential case, provide your contact information below. This will not be published.

NOTE: Providing information for review by an attorney does not form an attorney-client relationship.

MORE TOP STORIES

Parties involved in a Dupixent T-cell lymphoma wrongful death lawsuit will participate in an initial status conference in early December, to map out how the litigation will move forward.
A group of plaintiffs are asking a panel of federal judges to consolidate all Lyft lawsuits involving driver sexual assaults against passengers before one judge as part of a Lyft MDL.
Federal regulators warned years ago that mesh implants were never approved for use in breast surgery, yet manufacturers continued marketing them as internal bra devices for reconstruction and cosmetic augmentation.