Archive for the ‘Knee Replacement News’ Category

Hip Implant Complaints Surge, Even as the Dangers Are Studied

Tuesday, August 23rd, 2011

Tim Shaffer for The New York Times

Ann Morrison experienced pain, rashes and inflammation soon after receiving all-metal replacements for each of her hips.

By and
Published: August 22, 2011

The federal government has received a surge in complaints in recent months about failed hip replacements, suggesting that serious problems persist with some types of artificial hips even as researchers scramble to evaluate the health dangers.

An analysis of federal data by The New York Times indicates that the Food and Drug Administration has received more than 5,000 reports since January about several widely used devices known as metal-on-metal hips, more than the agency had received about those devices in the previous four years combined.

The vast majority of filings appear to reflect patients who have had an all-metal hip removed, or will soon undergo such a procedure because a device failed after only a few years; typically, replacement hips last 15 years or more.

The mounting complaints confirm what many experts have feared — that all-metal replacement hips are on a trajectory to become the biggest and most costly medical implant problem since Medtronic recalled a widely used heart device component in 2007. About 7,700 complaints have been filed in connection with that recall.

Though immediate problems with the hip implants are not life-threatening, some patients have suffered crippling injuries caused by tiny particles of cobalt and chromium that the metal devices shed as they wear.

Hip replacement is one of the most common procedures in the United States and, until a recent sharp decline, all-metal implants — one in which both the artificial ball and cup are made of metal — accounted for nearly one-third of the estimated 250,000 replacements performed each year. According to one estimate, some 500,000 patients have received an all-metal replacement hip.

One of the most problematic devices, the A.S.R., or Articular Surface Replacement, was recalled last year by Johnson & Johnson and accounted for 75 percent of the complaints reviewed by The Times. A precise count of failed implants reported to the F.D.A. is hard to come by because of the agency’s overlapping reporting system, though The Times sought to eliminate duplicate reports about the same incident. Some complaints came from outside the United States.

Under F.D.A. rules, many all-metal devices were sold without testing in patients or without a requirement that producers track their performance. But in an unusual intervention, the F.D.A. in May ordered producers to study how frequently the devices were failing and to examine the threat to patients. Now, researchers say, producers face substantial hurdles in recruiting the hundreds of patients needed to conduct sound studies because of the lack of patient registries.

“They are grasping at how they are going to get this information,” said Dr. Robert S. Namba, an orthopedic surgeon with Kaiser Permanente.

In addition, researchers are struggling to understand the tissue damage caused by the metallic debris. While some patients experience pain, other patients with the same damage have no pain, complicating decisions about whether to remove devices.

As problems and questions grow, most surgeons are abandoning the all-metal hips, saying they are unwilling to expose new patients to potential dangers when safer alternatives — mainly replacements that combine metal and plastic components — are available. Some researchers also fear that many all-metal hips suffer from a generic flaw. Current use of all metal devices has plummeted to about 5 percent of the market, though a few of the models are performing relatively well in select patients.

“It is like playing Russian roulette,” said Dr. Geoffrey H. Westrich, an orthopedic surgeon at the Hospital for Special Surgery in New York, who has stopped using all-metal implants.

Dr. William Maisel, the chief scientist of the F.D.A. division that oversees medical devices, said he believed that producers would mount rigorous studies and find answers. But he acknowledged that it could take several years.

“There is not an existing infrastructure for studying this kind of information,” Dr. Maisel said.

For many patients, it is too late. In 2008, Ann Morrison, a physical therapist from Newark, Del., received all-metal replacements for both of her hips. But Ms. Morrison, 50, soon experienced pain, rashes and inflammation.

Last year, the devices were replaced, but by then, she said, debris-caused tissue damage was so extensive that she now needs a brace to walk and still cannot work. She called the F.D.A.’s order for medical studies a “joke.”

“We will be the little crash test dummies here until they figure out the health ramifications for us down the road,” said Ms. Morrison, who has sued the DePuy division of Johnson & Johnson, which made her implants.

To conduct its analysis, The Times reviewed complaints filed with the F.D.A. from 2007 through this June for several implants, including the A.S.R. and the Durom cup, a component sold by Zimmer Holdings.

Typically, the number of complaints filed with the F.D.A. about a product understates a problem because while companies must file reports, doctors and patients do not have to. The filing volume for the A.S.R. and the Durom cup probably reflects a surge of lawsuits filed against their makers.

The Times review found some 7,500 complaints about the A.S.R., nearly 5,000 of them coming since January. In the case of the Durom cup, about 1,600 complaints were filed with the regulator from 2007 to this June.

Because complaints to the F.D.A. are not uniform, it is impossible to say how many adverse reports about all-metal hips have been submitted. For example, the Times analysis found some 200 complaints about an all-metal version of another DePuy device called the Pinnacle as well as 400 additional complaints that noted metal-related problems in Pinnacle patients. But the Pinnacle is sold in several versions, so it was not clear how many of the metal-related complaints were linked to the all-metal device.

A spokesman for Zimmer Holdings said the Times review was “in the ballpark” of the company’s assessment of the drug administration’s filings. A DePuy spokeswoman declined to disclose the number of A.S.R. complaints that the company forwarded to the F.D.A. She maintained that the Pinnacle was performing well.

DePuy, Zimmer and another producer of metal hips, Wright Medical, declined to discuss the study proposals they had submitted to the F.D.A. to comply with its May order. A fourth company, Biomet, said it had proposed mounting a study of 400 patients who received its devices that would draw in part on studies already under way. The F.D.A. declined to release producers’ proposals, saying that they contained “confidential commercial information.” The agency has until November to decide on the plans’ adequacy.

In an effort to recruit patients, companies have recently contacted, researchers said, health systems like Kaiser Permanente and hospitals that operate their own implant registries.

Meanwhile, researchers say it may be a year before standard protocols are formulated that may be central to the future studies, like a uniform procedure to measure metallic ions in a patient’s blood or how to calibrate diagnostic equipment to best detect tissue damage.

U.S. advisers call for new medical device regime

Tuesday, August 2nd, 2011

Please read this latest article published on Reuters regarding new medical device regime:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/07/29/us-medical-device-regime-idUSTRE76S4D720110729

(Reuters) – An advisory group said the U.S. fast-track approval process for medical devices is fatally flawed and should be replaced, but the Food and Drug Administration said the recommendation was a non-starter.

The FDA had asked for the Institute of Medicine report as part of a broad agency review of its device unit, an area dogged by high staff turnover, funding woes and major recalls in recent year of devices ranging from artificial hips to heart defibrillators.

The IOM found the fast-track approval process, called 510(k), does not adequately protect patients and recommended a more thorough approval process likely to raise the costs for device makers with pre-market and post-market device reviews.

“What we are recommending is that the 510(k) is fatally flawed in terms of it not evaluating safety and effectiveness of a device,” said Dr. David Challoner, chairman of the IOM’s committee.

But the finding was swiftly rejected by the FDA’s top device official.

“FDA believes that the 510(k) process should not be eliminated, but we are open to additional proposals and approaches for continued improvement of our device review programs,” Dr. Jeffrey Shuren, director of the FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health, said in a statement.

The 510(k) program allows medical devices to get to market faster if they are “substantially equivalent” to an existing product.

Critics say the accelerated 510(k) process is too widely used and leads to inadequate testing for some risky devices, but it is defended by the industry as necessary to speed technologies to patients.

The medical device industry has argued for either leaving the 510(k) process as it is or further streamlining the approval process. Most new medical devices — about 4,000 in 2009 — are cleared through the accelerated program.

The industry group Advanced Medical Technology Association, or AdvaMed, said Congress and the FDA should not seriously consider the report’s conclusions.

“(The report) proposes abandoning efforts to address the serious problems with the administration of the current program by replacing it at some unknown date with an untried, unproven and unspecified new legal structure,” AdvaMed’s CEO and president Stephen Ubl said. “This would be a disservice to patients and the public health.”

The FDA has proposed changes, including the possibility of creating a new category of more risky devices that would require more data to win approval.

But the IOM committee said the FDA should not waste its limited resources on changing the current program. Instead, the committee said the FDA should focus on developing a new framework.

High-profile incidents include a massive recall last year of artificial hips by Johnson & Johnson’s DePuy unit. Some 93,000 patients worldwide had that line of hip implant.

Automated external defibrillators, used in public places such as airports to revive cardiac arrest victims, have also made up a significant portion of 510(k) recalls in recent years. Health officials are looking at thousands of reports of malfunctions which may have led to patient harm or death.

Medical devices range from simple bandages to complex implants such as pacemakers, stents and artificial knees. Other than Johnson & Johnson, the largest medical-device makers include Medtronic Inc, Boston Scientific Corp and Abbott Laboratories Inc.

The IOM suggested the FDA start collecting information to build the new process, including post-market data for devices. Congress should then enact legislation to design the regulatory framework, according to the report.

“A new system needs to be put in place that will be more effective especially in post-market surveillance,” said Challoner.

Keefe Bartels Appointed Co-Lead Counsel for DePuy ASR Hip Implant Litigation in New Jersey

Tuesday, May 10th, 2011

Red Bank, N.J. – May 10, 2011 – Today the Court appointed Keefe Bartels as co-lead counsel in the DePuy ASR hip implant litigation for the State of New Jersey.  The Court’s Order ratified Keefe Bartels’s election to the post by participating lawyers from New Jersey and other parts of the country.  Previously, the New Jersey Supreme Court had assigned all pending and future New Jersey state-court hip implant litigation to Bergen County for centralized management by the Honorable Brian R. Martinotti.

DePuy is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson, headquartered in New Brunswick, NJ.  DePuy Orthopedics manufactured the ASR Hip Replacement System.  Worldwide implants of the DePuy ASR XL Acetabular System and the ASR Hip Resurfacing System implants totaled approximately 93,000.  The ASR Hip Implant has a troubled domestic and international history.  In 2009, due to defects, Johnson & Johnson discontinued these implants.  High failure rates necessitated an August 26, 2010 recall.

John E. Keefe, Jr., a co-managing member of Keefe Bartels, stated:

We are honored and excited that our firm will remain on the cutting edge of this litigation. Keefe Bartels began investigating claims from patients with ASR Hip Implant replacements over a year before the August 2010 recall. We are eager to aggressively litigate these claims. We are especially pleased to litigate against Johnson & Johnson in its home state of New Jersey.  New Jersey’s strong and independent judiciary provides an experienced and fair forum for the efficient litigation and trial of these cases.

Joshua S. Kincannon leads the medical device litigation team at Keefe Bartels.  He explains: 

This case is about information, both for plaintiffs and defendants.  For Defendants, a crucial question is ‘What did they know and when did they know it?’  We look forward to working with New Jersey lawyers as well as plaintiffs’ counsel from across the country in answering that and other questions as we help victims and their families who have been injured by one of these devices.

For more information about these cases, or for a free consultation, contact Joshua S. Kincannon at 1-877-ATTY-247 or visit www.defectivejoints.com www.keefebartels.com.

Hip Implant Recall Questions? Hip Replacement Recall Victims Need to Know How to Get Compensation

Thursday, May 5th, 2011

As we have been discussing on this site, thousands of  patients who have undergone hip replacement surgery are now concerned about whether the recent recalls affect their implants.  With more and more cases appearing all the time, these concerns deserve attention.

Hip replacement patients want to know how they can tell if they have a faulty implant.  They want to know what to do if they discover that they are affected by one of the hip replacement recalls.  Today, with help from the hip implant specialists at KeefeBartels and DefectiveJoints.com, patients can find assistance and answers to many of their questions.

Defective Hip Implant Symptoms

Hip implant surgery is an  invasive and painful procedure.  Most patient simply hope to walk again without pain. However, many patients are discovering that instead of moving on with their lives, they now suffer from more pain than before.  And many patients will have to undergo painful revision surgery in order to deal with a faulty hip implant.

Because of the pain and recovery associated with hip implant surgery, many patients find it difficult to determine whether continuing pain is normal after surgery or whether implant-related complications are causing the pain.  Patients should know that symptoms of complications include:

  • * Pain continuing weeks or months after surgery
  • * Pain worsening after surgery
  • * Swollenness or tenderness in the hip area
  • * Increased difficulty walking
  • * Grinding, squeaking or popping noises in the hip area
  • * Loosening or instability of the hip
  • * General discomfort
  • * Trouble rising from a seated position

Non-Obvious Symptoms of Faulty Hip Implants

Not all symptoms are obvious, and not all seem related to the hip implant.  Some of the most dangerous problems may not be apparent at all.  Metal-on-metal implants, such as the faulty Depuy ASR, cause problems of metal toxicity, which occu

rs when the metal ball rubs against the metal socket, releasing microscopic metal particles into the blood stream and surrounding tissues.

Patients who received one of metal-on-metal implants should get a blood test to determine whether there has been a release of dangerous metal particles.  Symptoms of metal toxicity are subtle and easily overlooked, including nausea, fatigue, and even memory loss.

Recalls of Metal-on-Metal Hip Implants

Defective metal-on-metal implants, such as the Depuy ASR and Zimmer Durom Cup, have recently been recalled.  Patients who have one of these faulty  implants should have their metal levels checked regularly, whether or not symptoms are apparent and should also contact a legal specialist to learn about their rights.

Sadly, too often many patients wait too long before getting legal advice.   When they finally consult with an attorney, they may discover that the statute of limitations has expired.   And once that happens, the patient has virtually no chance of getting the recovery he or she deserves.

If you have  had hip replacement surgery and are still in pain, don’t let the statute of limitations run out.   You may have one of the recalled DePuy ASR XL implants, a Zimmer Durom Cup implant, or a Stryker Trident implant.  Even if you don’t know what type of implant you have, if you are in pain or experiencing any of the syptoms mentioned above, you should probably consult an attorney.

Free Legal Consultation

The experienced legal professionals at KeefeBartels offer free consultations in multiple locations across New Jersey.  If you or a loved one is suffering from a defective hip replacement or any other faulty implant, do not wait.  Contact us today and let us discuss your rights with you.  You should know your options.

Zimmer Knee Replacement Failing at Unusually High Rate

Tuesday, February 22nd, 2011
Since it was introduced in 2003, Zimmer has sold more than 150,000 NexGen CR-Flex artificial knees. However, the Zimmer NexGen CR-Flex knee replacement has been failing at an unusually high rate.
Zimmer NexGen CR-Flex knee replacement

Patients complain that the implant parts loosen and shift. Even after a revision surgery, some patients experience nerve damage, tissue scarring, and reduced flexibility and mobility.  Patients often find themselves still on pain medication months and years after the revision.

Knee implants are supposed to last 15 years.  However, many patients with Zimmer NexGen CR-Flex replacements have had to undergo painful revision surgery within 3 years of the initial implant.

(more…)

Metal on Metal Implants – Important Risk Information

Tuesday, June 15th, 2010

Metal on metal hip implants account for approximately one-third of the 250,000 hip implants done in the United States annually.  However there is mounting evidence that these implants may be defective, and that these defects may cause a variety of serious problems in patients.  Data from joint registries confirms that metal on metal implants are more likely to fail and require a revision surgery than any other bearing interface.

When a metal on metal hip implant is used in a total hip arthroplasty or a hip resurfacing surgery, the acetabular insert, which was typically made with a type of plastic known as ultra high molecular weight polyethylene, is instead made out of cobalt chromium, and articulates against a metal femoral head, which is also made of cobalt chromium.

The problem with this type of interface is multi-factorial.  When hip or knee implant components move against each other, the friction causes wear.  This happens with any medical device implant, just as it occurs with your god given joints.  The body attempts to rid itself of this particulate debris by carrying the particles away in the lymphatic system.  However, the wear particles that are produced from a metal on metal implant may be detrimental to patients’ health in a number of ways.   (more…)

Recent Hip, Knee, and Replacement Joint News

Monday, May 3rd, 2010

4/13/2009

Defective joint and product liability lawyers, Keefe Bartels & Clark have begun investigation of Wright Medical Technology Total Hip Implants

The defective joint implant attorneys at Keefe Bartels & Clark have begun investigating reports regarding total hip implants manufactured by Wright Medical Technology, Inc., a Tennessee Corporation. Wright manufactures and distributes orthopaedic implants including implants for the hips and knees. The FDA’s Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience Database (MAUDE) indicates several reports regarding the failure of Wright Total Hip Systems that use the Conserve product line as well as the Profemur Product lines.

The defective product attorneys at Keefe Bartels & Clark are currently screening patients who had the Conserve Plus Cup and the Profemur Stem and/or Neck implants utilized in their total hip replacement and are experiencing problems or have experienced a device failure. In some cases, these components fracture, resulting in a “catastrophic” failure of the hip implant device. Other components may not promote, and may in fact, retard, bony ingrowth, resulting in the devices loosening and requiring additional surgery to repair or replace the failed component. These implants may have been designed or manufactured in a defective manner. If you believe you may have one of these hip implant components, and are suffering from pain, swelling, or limitation on your range of motion, or if you have had to have the hip implant revised, please contact the defective hip implant lawyers at Keefe Bartels & Clark immediately.

1/22/2009

New Jersey Court Announces Application for Mass Tort Designation of Litigation involving Stryker Trident Hip Implants and assignment for centralized management in Atlantic County, New Jersey.

Motion made for Mass Tort designation for Stryker Trident Hip System

Pursuant to New Jersey Court Rule 4:38A and the Revised Mass Tort Guidelines, application has been made to the New Jersey Supreme Court requesting that the claims made against Stryker Corp., and its subsidiary Howmedica Osteonics Corp., regarding the Stryker Trident Hip Implant System be designated a Mass Tort and sent to Judge Higbee in Atlantic County New Jersey for centralized management.

The Stryker Trident Hip Implant is a ceramic implant that has been the subject of numerous claims involving the hip implant making squeaking noises. This sound is caused by the high levels of friction at the acetabular interface of the implant. This condition can be an indicator of more serious problems with the implant in the future, and the hip implant attorneys at Keefe Bartels & Clark allege that these devices suffer from either a manufacturing or design defect which is resulting in the squeaking hip noise reported by some patients. If you or a loved one has a hip implant that is squeaking, please contact our office immediately.

(more…)