Smith and Nephew Hip Replacement LawyersSmith and Nephew Hip Replacement Lawyers.
Smith and Nephew metal-on-metal hip implants are currently affecting thousands of patients suffering from severe side effects across the United States. These devices are failing at a rate much higher than expected, posing serious health problems.
Smith and Nephew continued to market these products in disregard to reports that showed metal-on-metal hip implants failing at a higher rate than metal on polyethylene hip implants and causing excessive cobalt and chromium ions being released into the body.
Symptoms of Injury
Due to the defective R3 Acetabular and Birmingham (BHR) total hip replacement implants, Smith
and Nephew Orthopaedics is facing a growing number of hip replacement lawsuits and mass tort actions.
Injured patients are reporting premature loosening, immobility, and implant failure –
along with many other painful symptoms, such as:
- Bone chipping
- Bone fractures
- Tissue damage
- Chronic pain
If you have suffered pain or injury because of your defective Smith and Nephew hip implant, you may be entitled to compensation through a Smith and Nephew hip implant lawsuit. Ask your surgeon which specific hip implant system you received during your surgery.
If it is the R3 Acetabular model that used R3 metal liners, then it has been recalled and you should consult with us about filing a Smith and Nephew hip implant lawsuit to recover the compensation you deserve. If you are not aware of which hip implant you have received, we’d be glad to assist you in finding out.
Know Your Rights: Do You Have A Case?
Due to their negligence, Smith and Nephew has been subject to hip implant lawsuits and mass tort actions. If you have received an R3 Acetabular System replacement hip or Birmingham (BHR) total hip replacement prosthesis manufactured by this company, you might have a case against the manufacturer. Damages in the form of monetary compensation could include coverage of your actual medical costs (to include future medical costs), loss of earnings, and pain and suffering.
Even if you do not know what type of implant you have received, our team would be happy to assist you in obtaining this information. It is essential that you call us today if you know that you have received a hip implant that has been recalled, even if you are not currently experiencing pain or physical symptoms.
“There are a lot of pitfalls you can fall into in this type of case,” said attorney Daniel Nigh, with Levin, Papantonio, Law Firm. “As soon as you find out that you even have a recalled product, regardless if you have any problems, you should call an attorney to ask about your rights given the recall.”
Just provide us with some basic information about your case and we will take it from there.
Thousands of patients were implanted with Smith and Nephew metal-on-metal total hip replacements, and our attorneys have spoken with quite a few that have been injured by these hip replacements—specifically, clients that were implanted with the recalled Smith and Nephew R3 metal-on-metal hip prosthesis or BHR prosthesis during a total hip replacement procedure.
Smith and Nephew announced that unlike other metal-on-metal hip implants, the patients implanted with the R3 metal liner were not typically experiencing issues with cobalt and chromium ions being released from the implant and causing metallosis reactions. However, Levin Law attorney and advocate Daniel Nigh’s review of clients’ medical records who have had revisions to remove the R3 metal liner, or who have had revisions to remove the BHR cup-and-ball, has shown that these clients have had a variety of problems with the cobalt and chromium ions.
Smith and Nephew voluntarily withdrew the optional metal liner component of its R3 Aceabular System hip replacement implant due to the company’s analysis of clinical studies which showed “a higher than normal level of patient problems” were occurring with the device, meaning it wasn’t doing what it was designed to do. Clinical trials of the metal-cup component showed that 1.6 percent required revision surgery each year, the guideline in the U.K. where the company is based, was 1 percent.
“Companies unfortunately put money ahead of the safety,” said Ben Gordon, a patient advocate at Levin, Papantonio Law Firm who is assisting with Smith and Nephew cases. “Instead of focusing on patient safety and clinical trial outcomes, and how patients would do with a given product, they jumped onto a bandwagon with the notion that these devices were a huge marketing opportunity. They took it from a market of about 100,000 people in the United States to in the 90s to close to half a million people a year by 2010.”
Smith and Nephew BHR implants have been in the U.S. market since 2006, and though not currently recalled, many patients have also been suffering similar symptoms to other metal-on-metal complications to the R3 system.
Smith and Nephew’s R3 Acetabular System contains a metal liner component that was recalled by the FDA in June of 2012 due to its association with implant dislocation, infection and bone fracture that was causing patients to suffer and often requiring revision surgery. The recall followed the company’s analysis of clinical trials showing a “higher than normal level of patient problems with the device.” Smith and Nephew introduced the hip replacement liner in 2009, and since that time about 7,700 patients have had them implanted.
This modular metal-on-metal hip replacement system contains both metal cup and head components that were originally designed to last longer than their ceramic and plastic counterparts. Experts now believe there are additional health risks, including chromium and cobalt poisoning caused by loose metal fragments shed by the device.
Levin Law Firm will be your advocate, fighting for patients who have needlessly suffered injury as a result of the R3 system.
Another problematic Smith and Nephew product is the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing (BHR) System, which has also seen a high rate of complications in both resurfacing and total hip replacement patients. This metal-on-metal device was the first of its kind approved in the United States. Many other manufacturers have mimicked its design and have recently been linked to high rates of complications, failures and recalls.
In September 2012, Smith & Nephew issued an “Urgent Field Safety Notice” for the Birmingham Modular Head hip implant. They stated: “The average revision rate for the Birmingham hip with all stems is currently 1.29 revisions per 100 observed component years.”
Our law firm is taking on cases where the system was used in total hip replacement procedures. Contact our team today to discuss your potential claim and start the process to be compensated for your needless pain and suffering. We would be glad to help you understand your legal rights today!
- Hip Replacement Lawsuit Website Launched by Bernstein Liebhard LLP to Provide Updated Information on Hip Replacement Recalls, Growing Metal Hip Implant Litigation (prweb.com)
- Conflict of Interest of “industry experts” – Open letter from Dr Steve to Dr Frick… (earlsview.com)
- Risks, Benefits and Recovery From Birmingham Hip Procedures (arthritis.answers.com)
- Biomet Video Released by d’Oliveira & Associates Informs Public of Dangers Associated with the Metal-on-Metal Device. (prweb.com)
- Biomet Video Released by d’Oliveira & Associates Informs Public of… (prweb.com)
- Study: Metal Hip Pain and Tissue Damage – Stryker Rejuvenate Hip Implant (earlsview.com)
- Birmingham Hip Resurfacing System: A Treatment Overview (arthritis.answers.com)
- HUNGER STRIKE – Smith & Nephew BHR problems drive Paige to Ruin & Desperate Measures – HUNGER STRIKE (earlsview.com)
- Hanna’s Story – another Smith & Nephew BHR tale of disaster (earlsview.com)
- Profits Drop 4% at Smith & Nephew (fool.com)
It appears the tide may now finally be turning for Smith and Nephew. While were on this subject, I wanted to put this YouTube link up from late last month. It provides a longer and much more informative interview of S&N recall attorney Nigh, this time on the show “Ring of Fire”, a great program that is an example of speaking truth to power. I have enjoyed the show for years, and the information it provides is sorely lacking in our corporately controlled radio and television stations (here in the US). Other parts of the world seem to report actual news stories, but our plight in the US appears one of a continuous barrage of corporate propaganda and distraction, inasmuch as these very conglomerates own all of our networks and cable channels.
Here’s the clip:
Barbara Ford said:
I thought in 2012 when they announced the recall of the BHR total hip replacement that it was only a matter of time before the BHR was recalled but I am disappointed to see that Smith and Nephew are still touting it as the best device out there and claiming it’s the best thing for younger people who can then go back to their active lifestyles.
This is bizarre: I have had 4 hip replacements since 2007, both Smith and Nephew devices. I had an attorney for an MDL (Multi-District-Litigation), Joseph Lyons. He and his firm were looking for other firms to join up with. Yesterday, I got a letter from Mr. Lyons saying that another firm he had managed to join up with (I guess), had decided I was to be dismissed from their case. The other firm happens to be the one you are today touting! Joseph mentioned “Ben” and M. Papantonio as being the ones who discarded me. What is going on?
Joseph said it was because I didn’t have the implement. He is right on the first revision, but then I retained him and he assured me he would get the second implement with tissue samples, etc.
Now he’s telling me I’m no longer a candidate because I had a resurfacing, which he knew months ago . . . yet all the symptoms and damage and necrosis and metallosis have been my Smith and Nephew resurfacing. I’ve been in bed for 3 years . . . now that Joseph Lyon has different priorities.
Earl, I’m counting on you. If Paige were still on her hunger strike, I would join her.
Mickey, I feel horrible for people like you and Howard. please see my comment just posted to him and read please the string below.
Mickey, please see my comment today to Howard Sadwin and the power of the PMA, which is established ‘case law’ by our Supreme Court and makes S&N impenetrable on their BHR piece of garbage.
Though Earl is spot on here on his helpful blog (correction from comment) he is here (IMHO) to break stories, provide enlightening and relevant commentary, but he is not a lawyer.
This is why you and Howard and all BHR sufferers are not allowed into the consolidated claim for BHR THA victims:
Pingback: Hillary’s Story – Resurfacing Nightmare | Earl's View