Stryker Hip Lawsuit Filed Over LFit v40 Femoral Head Failure Months Before Warning

Months before a warning was issued about problems with Stryker LFit V40 femoral heads, a product liability lawsuit was filed by a woman who experienced catastrophic failure of her hip replacement, which was allegedly caused by this defective component.

A complaint (PDF) was filed by Annah Maria Gidora in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York more than a month before Stryker issued an “Urgent Medical Device Product Field Action Notification (PDF)” in late August, warning about the risk of LFit v40 femoral head failures.

Gidora indicates that the Stryker Lfit V40 femoral head was one of several components that made up her MDM X3 Mobile Bearing Hip System, which she received as part of right hip total hip replacement surgery in January 2014. Other components that were part of the hip replacement system Gidora received included the Accolade II 127 Neck Angle Hip Stern, Acetabular Dome Hole Plug, Trident Acetabular Shell, Torx Cancellous Bone Screws, and Modular Dual Mobility (MDM) Liner.

The higher-than-expected rate of failures with Stryker hip replacements involving the Lfit V40 head did not gain widespread attention until late last month, when Australia’s Therapeutic Goods Administration issued a hazard alert. The warning noted that certain femoral heads manufactured before 2011 may experience taper lock failures, which can result in loss of mobility, pain, inflammation, adverse local tissue reactions, dislocation and the need for revision surgery, among other complications.

Gidora’s complaint indicates that she suffered many of those same problems following her Stryker hip replacement.

“After the defendants’ device was implanted, Plaintiff began to experience pain ambulating including bending, climbing (and descending stairs), lifting movements, pushing, sitting, walking and standing,” the lawsuit states. “As a result of the defendants’ conduct, on October 26, 2015, Plaintiff underwent a total hip revision.”

That revision surgery, and problems with the hip system, left Gidora with permanent injuries, loss of mobility, and an increased risk of future complications, the lawsuit states.

Gidora presents claims of negligence, manufacturing defect, design defect, inadequate warning, breach of warranty, and violation of New York consumer protection laws.

The case is not the first filed over Stryker hip systems that contained the LFit V40 femoral head. In 2014, at least five similar Stryker hip lawsuits were filed by individuals who experienced LFit V40 femoral head failures, alleging that the components were defectively designed and manufactured.

As more individuals learn that problems with Stryker Accolade hip implants, or other systems involving the Lfit V40 femoral head, may be linked to this component, it is expected that hip replacement lawyers will file a growing number of complaints in the coming months and years.