Law Street Media

Hip Replacement Recipient Sues Manufacturer for Injuries After Implant Fails

Two doctors discussing information on a tablet.

Shot of two young doctors using a digital tablet late at night in a modern hospital

An Arizona man has filed a lawsuit against the manufacturer of a hip replacement device after it failed and had to be removed surgically. The complaint named Zimmer US Inc., doing business as Zimmer Biomet, Zimmer Inc., and Zimmer Biomet Holdings Inc. (collectively Zimmer), as defendants in the District of Arizona suit.

Monday’s filing explained that Zimmer developed its trademarked Durom Cup hip system for surgical implantation in patients in need of a total hip arthroplasty or replacement. The Durom Cup allegedly received United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval for domestic distribution in 2006.

According to the complaint, a little more than two years later, in September 2008, the FDA issued a misbranding recall of the product. Allegedly, the FDA recalled the product because the instructions for use and surgical technique were determined to be inadequate.

The filing explained that in November 2008, a physician performed a total hip joint replacement on the plaintiff who was, at the time, 61 years old using the Durom Cup. In December 2019, the plaintiff said they began to experience pain and discomfort in his hip. After medical consultation, he was told that he may need to undergo revision surgery to replace the faulty bionic part, the complaint stated.

The plaintiff had the removal surgery and claimed that he has suffered personal injuries because of Zimmer’s defectively designed and manufactured implant. According to the complaint, the plaintiff’s injuries include an increased risk of requiring further revision surgeries, pain, emotional trauma, and physical impairment. The complaint also made a loss of consortium claim on behalf of the plaintiff’s wife.

The plaintiff seeks compensatory and punitive damages for Zimmer’s allegedly “willful, wanton or recklessly gross acts,” his court costs, and any other relief deemed appropriate.

The plaintiff is represented by Skousen, Gulbrandsen & Patience, PLC.

Exit mobile version