Revision surgeries are often more complex than the initial procedure because there is less bone to work with, which increases the risk of complications.
New York, NY (PRWEB) December 11, 2012
Parker Waichman LLP, a national law firm dedicated to protecting the rights of victims injured by defective medical devices, has filed a lawsuit alleging that the Biomet M2a Magnum hip implant caused various complications leading to revision surgery in a California woman. The suit was filed on November 15th in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California (Case No. 5:12-cv-01999-TJH-DTB). Biomet, Inc. and Biomet Orthopedics, LLC have been named as Defendants.
According to the Complaint, the Plaintiff was implanted with the Biomet M2a Magnum hip implant in February 2008. The suit alleges that the implant caused a number of complications, including severe pain, toxic chromium and cobalt poisoning and sequalae. The Plaintiff underwent revision surgery in late 2010, allegedly due to the defective nature of the device. The lawsuit alleges that this procedure, which is performed when the implant fails, leaves the Plaintiff more susceptible to greater risks in the future. Revision surgeries are often more complex than the initial procedure because there is less bone to work with, which increases the risk of complications.
According to the lawsuit, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had received over 100 adverse event reports related to the Biomet M2a Magnum at the time the Plaintiff received her implant. The Defendants, however, allegedly withheld this information, exposing the Plaintiff and other consumers to a number of health risks.
The Biomet M2a Magnum is a type of metal-on-metal hip implants. The lawsuit states that this class of medical devices is associated with health risks because the all-metal design forces metal to rub against metal with the full weight of the body, causing metal ions to be released into the bloodstream and local tissue. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has asked a number of manufacturers to conduct post market safety studies on the devices. In June, the agency convened a panel of experts to discuss the pros and cons of metal-on-metal hip implants. The experts recommended that metal hip patients undergo annual physicals, imaging scans to detect bone and tissue abnormalities and possible blood screening for metal ion levels.
A recent study, published in the Annals of the Rheumatic Disease, revealed a possible biological explanation for why metal ions may lead to complications seen in metal-on-metal hip patients. Researchers found that the presence of cobalt ions triggers an immune response, leading to inflammation and pseudotumors.
Parker Waichman LLP continues to offer free legal consultations to victims of metal-on-metal hip implant injuries. If you or a loved one experienced premature failure of your implant or other health problems associated with a metal-on-metal hip implant, please contact their office by visiting the firm's Defective Hip Implants page at yourlawyer.com. Free case evaluations are also available by calling 1 800 LAW INFO (1-800-529-4636).
Parker Waichman LLP
Gary Falkowitz, Managing Attorney