1329936629 1329936176 Lawsuit Category Browser

Do I Have A Lawsuit ?

Attorneys On Your Side

Lawsuit News Alerts

Wright Medical Hip Lawsuit Implant Replacement

Details
Parent Category: Lawsuit News Alerts
Category: Recall Lawsuit
  • Print

Wright Medical Hip Lawsuit  Implant Replacement 

Wright Medical Hip Lawsuit

NEWS RELEASE

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

LAWSUIT CITES DESIGN DEFECT, NEGLIGENCE IN FAILURE OF HIP-REPLACEMENT SYSTEM THAT FRACTURED IN PHOENIX PATIENT

Wright Medical Technology Changed Material in 2009, But Issued No Warnings or Recalls
           
Wright Hip Implant LawsuitPHOENIX, Ariz. (Feb. 22, 2012):  A Phoenix man filed a lawsuit today in U.S. District Court against Wright Medical Technology, Inc. and Wright Medical Group, Inc. after needing emergency surgery following a sudden catastrophic fracture of the titanium modular neck of the Wright ProFemur Total Hip System as he was dressing for work last July.

               Phoenix attorney Stephen Leshner and nationwide defective hip lawyer Joseph H. Saunders of Saunders & Walker P.A . filed the complaint against the Tennessee based company on behalf of Dale Purcell, who had the device implanted in June 2005 during a total left-hip replacement.  

The Wright Medical  ProFemur Total Hip System is comprised of three separate components which are assembled during surgery: a femoral head, a modular neck and the femoral stem.

               “There is a design defect in the femoral implant that causes it to fracture just below the neck,” Leshner said.  “When it fractures, you’re on the floor, in extreme pain and you have to have emergency surgery immediately.”  The nine-count complaint, which charges negligence, design defect, manufacturing defect, failure to warn and fraudulent misrepresentation, seeks unspecified general, special and punitive damages.

               “One minute I’m standing there getting dressed for work and the next I’m on the ground,” Parcell said.  “At first I thought there was an earthquake that knocked me down, but then the pain hit and I couldn’t move my leg.”

               Purcell, 57, underwent revision surgery at Chandler Regional Medical Center on July 7, 2011 when surgeons had to remove the “fractured fragments of the ProFemur Z titanium modular femoral neck” and noted “some mild corrosion” at the site of the fracture, according to the complaint.

According to the complaint, “the titanium modular neck used in Mr. Parcell fractured and broke very near the femoral stem, leaving a broken portion of the titanium neck wedged inside the stem.  The fracture of the modular neck adapter caused failure of the system, requiring corrective surgery, and made it extremely difficult to extract the fragment.”

               The complaint points out that “studies have shown that modular neck adapters made from titanium alloy, such as the ProFemur modular neck adapter” “are more likely to suffer fretting corrosion and fatigue fracture than those made from cobalt-chromium.”

               A 2009 report by the Australian Orthopaedic Association showed that the Wright Wright Hip Implant LawsuitProFemur Z femoral stem had a high failure rate requiring approximately 11.2 percent of all patients receiving the implant to need revision surgery.

               According to the complaint, in 2009, Wright Medical changed the material in the ProFemur Hip System Modular Necks from titanium to cobalt chrome alloy, but the company took “no corrective action in the form of a recall or even an announcement of warning to the medical community or to the public at large concerning its decision to switch from titanium modular neck adapters to cobalt chrome adapters.”

               “At all relevant times, Defendants knew, or should have known, that the Device which included a titanium modular femoral neck was more prone to fatigue fracture and failure than a device made with a cobalt chromium modular neck,” according to the complaint.


Read More About Wright Medical Hip Replacement Lawsuit Implants

               ----------

If you or a loved one has questions about any recalled , defective or suspected defective hip replacement / implant device … please call the lead attorney handling these cases for doihavealawsuit.com by calling (800) 748 - 7115 or submit your information via our online form for immediate free case review.

We are here to help!

Hip Replacement Recall Lawsuit

Details
Parent Category: Lawsuit News Alerts
Category: Recall Lawsuit
  • Print

Hip Replacement Implant Recall Lawsuit

Hip Replacement Recall Lawsuit


Hip Replacement Implant LawsuitLawsuits against metal-on-metal hip implant manufacturers have been on the rise in the recent months following disclosures by a number of researchers, independent consumer groups, and health agencies that the artificial hip devices are more dangerous than previously reported. The lawsuits allege that the all-metal hips shed tiny metal particles as a result of friction between the metal ball and cup, causing bone, nerve, and muscle damage. There have been growing concerns that the all-metal hip devices cause metal toxicity in the body, resulting in extreme pain and swelling and requiring complicating revision surgeries to remove and replace the defective implants. It is estimated that tens of thousands of patients in the country may require revision surgery over the next decade to replace the defective and worn-out implants.


Recently, a report published by the British Hip Society fears that failure rate 


of the DePuy ASR XL Acetabular system could be as high as 50% merely six years after the surgery, contrary to the manufacturer’s claims that the device could last 15 years. According to a report published in the New York Times, the “unusually high cost of failing artificial hips" has resulted in the most widespread metal-on-metal implant failure in the recent decades, which requires premature replacement.


All Metal Hip  Replacement Implant Device

Since the ball and cup components in all-metal hip implants are made of 

Hip Replacement Recall Lawsuit

metal, any movement on the part of the recipient causes friction, which releases tiny particles into the bloodstream. Evidence has shown that patients begin suffering soft tissue reactions when the metal particles flake off into the bloodstream, causing cobalt poisoning and destroying muscle and bone. As a result, the hip implants fail to stay attached to the bone, causing the device to loosen and leading to dislocation of the cup. This may cause bone fracture around the implant, deposition of metal fragments in the bloodstream, and pseudotumors.


Many of the patients that have suffered hip implant failures had to undergo risky, painful, complex, and costly secondary surgeries to remove and replace the defective hip merely five years after the hip implantation. According to some surgeons, revision surgery is a complicated process and they find it difficult to remove the worn-out all-metal hip.


DePuy Metal On Metal Hip Replacement


In August 2010, DePuy Orthopedics had to recall its ASR™ XL Acetabular hip system due to a flaw in design after researchers reported more-than-expected failure rates, with over 13 percent patients requiring revision surgery within five years of the device implantation. Reports indicate that an increasing number of patients continue to suffer problems associated with the DePuy ASR all-metal hip implants. In the first six months of 2011, the FDA

Read more: Hip Replacement Recall Lawsuit

Lawsuit Attorney

Details
Category: Lawsuit News Alerts
  • Print

Cigarette Tobacco Lawsuit

Details
Parent Category: Lawsuit News Alerts
Category: Side Effects Lawsuit
  • Print

Cigarette Tobacco Lawsuit


cigarette-lung-cancerOn January 26th, a Washington district court rejected the plea by tobacco majors, including Marlboro maker Philip Morris USA, to delay its verdict on placing graphic warning labels on cigarette packets. The 12-year-old lawsuit accuses the biggest US cigarette manufacturers of having concealed the risks associated with smoking for decades.

Judge Gladys Kessler has already ruled that the tobacco industry must pay for print and electronic ads informing people about the dangers of smoking cigarettes. However, her verdict regarding subject, design, placement, and duration of graphic warning labels on cigarette packets has yet to come. Executives and attorneys for big tobacco companies had requested that the court delay the judgment in view of pending litigation's over corrective label statements and marketing restrictions proposed by the United States government under federal tobacco regulations.

The Justice Department opposed the plea on grounds of postponing the verdict would result in failure to inform potential smokers and the youth about the risks of smoking. Regardless of the large number of Tobacco lawsuits filed after short and long term smokers developed lung cancer and many have died as a result of the link between cigarette smoking and lung cancer.

The Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act gives the Food and Drug Administration the authority to impose warnings and label changes on packaging of tobacco products and restrict advertisements with the objective to discourage their uses and inform users of health hazards caused by smoking.

While the FDA wants cigarette packaging to carry images showing smoking pitfalls, the Justice Department wants the tobacco companies to fund corrective print and electronic advertisement campaigns. These ads showcasing nicotine addictiveness, dangers posed by passive smoking, and potential health hazards of "low tar," "ultra-light" and "mild" cigarettes are planned as self-criticism of tobacco companies for misleading people about health risks associated with their products. In another jolt to cigarette manufacturers, the first tobacco lawsuit of 2012 resulted in a court verdict, asking RJ Reynolds and Philip Morris to pay $2.5 million to the wife of a smoker who died as a result of lung cancer.

Tobacco Lawsuits : Why Companies Are Forced To Pay for Ads?

Cigarette-Tobacco-Lawsuit
The primary aim of tobacco lawsuits filed by individual plaintiffs and government agencies is to hold cigarette manufacturers accountable for smoking-related wrongful deaths, health hazards, and medical expenses. Smoking has been linked to cancers, lung and heart problems, and a number of preventable diseases. Government officials blame smoking-related illness for a substantial increase in the cost of public health care. Tobacco costs the U.S. economy about $193 billion annually – $96 billion expenditure on direct health care and another $97 billion caused by lost productivity. Tobacco causes more than 440,000 deaths, including about 49,000 deaths caused by passive smoking, every year in the United States. Its consumption also accounts for about 90 percent of men and 80 percent of women dying from lung cancer each year. People who smoke are likely to be diagnosed with oral, throat, stomach, pancreas, and bladder cancer. Emphysema, bronchitis, chronic obstructive lung disease, and acute myeloid leukemia in patients are also the result of regular smoking. Research studies have shown that tobacco use increases the risk of heart diseases by six times. About 21 percent of the adult citizens and 20 percent of school students, who regularly smoke, are at the danger of these health problems.

Read more: Cigarette Tobacco Lawsuit

Transvaginal Mesh Lawsuit

Details
Parent Category: Lawsuit News Alerts
Category: Side Effects Lawsuit
  • Print

Transvaginal Mesh Lawsuit

Mesh Lawsuit Attorney

The Federal Drug Administration has issued a warning against the use of vaginal mesh implants and asked manufacturers, Johnson & Johnson and C.R. Bard Inc., to research rates of complications and organ damage linked to vaginal mesh implants. The transvaginal mesh has been the basis of multiple vaginal mesh lawsuits by attorneys nationwide.


The federal health regulator has received more than 3,000 reports of vaginal mesh implant complications and trans vaginal mesh side effects that have said to have injured many women in the United States. The manufacturers of these devices must be held liable for manufacturing and marketing defective products that have caused immense pain and suffering along with other complications among a large number of women users.

More than 650 lawsuits have been filed against vaginal mesh manufacturers of these defective devices, seeking compensation for the pain and suffering of the victims, lost wages, medical expenses and urging recall of the mesh implants, which had been cleared by the FDA for sale without human testing.

Vaginal Mesh Implant Attorney Studies

Further, a new study recently published in the Obstetrics and Gynecology journal has reported that women with mesh implants are more at a risk of requiring corrective surgeries within one year of the initial treatment than those treated for pelvic organ prolapse with other methods. The research found mesh erosion in one in six women merely three months after the device had been implanted surgically. Such women, the study says, face a higher rate of re-operation. Moreover, the study fails to find any improvement in the cure rates between the group treated with mesh implants and the no-mesh groups. The study questions whether the risks linked to mesh implants outweigh their benefits. Mesh lawsuit attorneys working with Do I Have A Lawsuit have in the past tried to answer this question for clients and the famalies of those who have been affected by the mesh implant.

Read more: Transvaginal Mesh Lawsuit

More Articles...

  1. Medical Malpractice Lawsuit
  2. Actos Bladder Cancer Lawyer
  3. Medical Malpractice Lawsuit
  4. Discrimination Lawsuit

Subcategories

Free Case Review

Free Case Review
  1. Your Name:(*)
    Please check your name for errors.
  2. E-mail Address:(*)
    Please provide your valid email address
  3. Phone Number:
    Invalid Input
  4. Street Address:
    Invalid Input
  5. City:
    Invalid Input
  6. State, Select Your State From The List:
    Invalid Input
  7. Zip Code:(*)
    Invalid Zip Code. Please enter your US Zip code.
  8. Method you prefer we use to contact you?
    Invalid Input
  9. General Case Information Please briefly explain your situation:(*)
    Please let us know your message.
  10. By submitting this inquiry I agree that the information that I will receive in response to the above question is general information and I will not be charged for the response to this e-mail question. I also agree that the above does not constitute a request for legal advice and that I am not forming an attorney client relationship by submitting this question. I understand that I may only retain an attorney by entering into an agreement, and that I am not hereby entering into an agreement by submitting my question.

Lawsuit Cases Popular Today