Earl's View » Metal on metal hip

The Myth of the Medical-Device Tax

earlstevens58 — Thu, 14 Nov 2013 21:27:15 +0000

The Myth of the Medical-Device Tax

WASHINGTON — IN the last few days of negotiations in Congress, repeal of the Affordable Care Act’s tax on medical devices emerged as a key Republican demand. The medical-device industry waged an intense lobbying campaign — even garnering the support of many Democrats who favored the law — arguing that the tax would stifle innovation and increase health care costs.

This argument is doubly disingenuous. Not only can the medical-device industry easily afford the tax without compromising innovation, but the industry’s enormous profits are a result of anticompetitive practices that themselves drive up medical-device costs unnecessarily. The tax is a distraction from reforms to the industry that are urgently needed to lower health care costs.

The medical-device industry faces virtually no price competition. Because of confidentiality agreements that manufacturers require hospitals to sign, the prices of the devices are cloaked in secrecy. This lack of transparency impedes hospitals from sharing price information and thus knowing whether they are getting a good deal.

Even worse, manufacturers often maintain personal relationships (sometimes involving financial payments like consulting fees) with physicians who choose the medical devices that their hospitals purchase, creating a conflict of interest. Physicians often don’t even know the costs of the devices, and individual physicians often choose devices on their own, which weakens a hospital’s ability to bargain for volume discounts.

Such anticompetitive practices help generate a wide variation in the prices of medical devices — and contribute to higher prices in general. For example, the Government Accountability Office found that prices for cardiac implantable medical devices in the United States vary by several thousand dollars. And even the lowest-priced devices in the United States are expensive compared with those in other developed countries. According to the consulting firm McKinsey & Company, the United States spends about 50 percent more than expected on the top five medical devices, compared with Europe and Japan. McKinsey calculates that this amounts to $26 billion in excessive spending each year. Medicare, private health insurers and patients end up paying these inflated prices.

Excessive prices fuel enormous profits — profits that dwarf both the medical-device tax and the industry’s investments in research and development. Consider the device division of Johnson & Johnson, which in 2012 had an operating profit of $7.2 billion. By the company’s own estimate, the device tax would amount to at most $300 million, and its investment in research and development amounts to only $1.7 billion.

There are several ways policy makers could lower device costs. The first step would be to end the anticompetitive practices that prevent hospitals from getting the best deals. Senator Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa, has sponsored legislation that would foster transparency by posting online price information for implantable medical devices.

In addition, instead of simply paying hospitals based in part on what they have spent on devices, Medicare should force manufacturers to compete for business based on a product’s price and quality.

Medicare should also pay hospitals a single lump sum for all of the associated costs of a given procedure (like a hip replacement). This approach, known as “bundling” the costs, would create incentives for hospitals to lower device costs. Savings should be shared with the physicians, so that their incentives are aligned with the hospital’s.

Bundling has been used successfully in pilot programs. Under Medicare’s Acute Care Episode Program — which bundled payments for cardiac and orthopedic procedures — physicians worked together to choose high-quality, cost-effective devices. Baptist Health System in Texas, which participated in the program, used clinical evidence to choose devices and negotiated lower prices for both Medicare and non-Medicare patients.

States could adopt similar payment reforms for private insurance and their Medicaid programs. In Arkansas, the Medicaid program and private payers — including Walmart — have collaborated to adopt bundled payments for several procedures, including hip and knee replacements.

To complement these efforts, the new Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, a nongovernmental body created by the Affordable Care Act, should pay for research that compares the effectiveness of devices so physicians can make informed choices. (Three years into its existence, the institute has initiated few, if any, studies of medical devices.) Medicare or the Food and Drug Administration should also require the use of registries that track when devices fail.

Currently, medical-device manufacturers allocate only a sliver of profits to research and development and often focus on “tweaks” to existing devices, without providing any evidence that they are of better quality. Competitive pressures from public and private payers would provide incentives for the industry to become more innovative, producing technologies that actually lowered costs and offered truly advanced breakthroughs.

Instead of using its clout to lobby against the device tax — which helped foment opposition to the Affordable Care Act — the medical-device industry needs to share the responsibility of lowering costs for patients, businesses and taxpayers.

The Myth of the Medical-Device Tax (nytimes.com)
Does medical device price gauging really contribute to wide variation in hospital charges? (medcitynews.com)
Medical device makers see hope for tax relief in federal shutdown talks (bizjournals.com)
Questions raised on medical devices supplied by doctor firms (jsonline.com)
New OIG study finds physician self-referral leads to increased spinal surgeries (pathologyblawg.com)
5 Ways mobile Is revolutionizing medical device sales (medcitynews.com)
Merit Medical Engineers to Present at Compamed 2013 (hispanicbusiness.com)
The new reality for medical devices: Justify your existence (medcitynews.com)

Filed under: Cobalt chrome, Cobalt Poisoning, DePuy ASR Hip, Hip Replacement, Hip Revisions, Johnson & Johnson, Metal on metal hip, Total Hip Replacement Tagged: Baptist Health System, Food and Drug Administration, Johnson & Johnson, McKinsey & Company, Medical device, Medicare, Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute, UNited States

Johnson & Johnson Said to Agree to $4 Billion Settlement Over Hip Implants

earlstevens58 — Thu, 14 Nov 2013 09:05:42 +0000

Johnson & Johnson Said to Agree to $4 Billion Settlement Over Hip Implants

Andrew Testa for The New York Times

A faulty Articular Surface Replacement, or A.S.R., removed from a patient in 2010.

By BARRY MEIER

Published: November 12, 2013

Johnson & Johnson has tentatively agreed to a settlement that could reach up to $4 billion to resolve thousands of lawsuits filed by patients injured by a flawed all-metal replacement hip, said two lawyers briefed on the plan.

The tentative plan, which must win court approval, represents one of the largest payouts for product liability claims involving a medical device.

A spokeswoman for the company’s DePuy Orthopaedics unit declined to comment on the possibility of a settlement. An announcement about the plan is expected in the coming days, the lawyers said.

The agreement will include those patients who have already been forced to have the device, known as the Articular Surface Replacement, or A.S.R., removed and replaced with another artificial hip, said the lawyers who spoke about the agreement only on the condition of anonymity.

Under the deal, each patient would receive about $350,000 on average in compensation, though that figure will vary depending on factors like a patient’s age and medical condition.

The precise value of the settlement is unclear because lawyers for patients are still trying to estimate how many of the 12,000 related lawsuits involve patients who had a replacement. Lawyers believe that number may be 7,000 to 8,000 cases.

The final cost of the deal to Johnson & Johnson could rise, depending on how many claimants who received the device undergo replacement operations in the future, the lawyers said. Under the plan, patients who have not had a replacement would not receive compensation, the lawyers said.

Read the full article here – New York Times

Johnson & Johnson Said to Agree to $4 Billion Settlement Over Hip Implants (nytimes.com)
J&J Said to Reach $4 Billion Deal to Settle Hip Lawsuits (bloomberg.com)
Johnson & Johnson DePuy hip implant settlement reported (lawprofessors.typepad.com)
Johnson & Johnson said to reach settlement for hip-implant suits (denverpost.com)
Johnson & Johnson Reaches $4 Billion Settlement Over Hip Implants (theatlanticwire.com)
Johnson & Johnson Investors Sweat, but the Dow Bounces Back (fool.com)
Johnson & Johnson Offer Two Settlement Deals for the DePuy ASR Hip Replacements (prweb.com)
Johnson & Johnson said to reach $4 billion accord to settle hip-implant claims (nj.com)
Johnson & Johnson to pay $4 billion settlement over metal-on-metal hip implants: Report (cbsnews.com)
DePuy ASR Settlement Update: Rottenstein Law Group LLP Comments on $4 Billion DePuy Hip Settlement News (businesslawdaily.net)

Filed under: Cobalt chrome, Cobalt Poisoning, Cobaltism, DePuy ASR Hip, DePuy Hip Litigation, Hip Replacement, Hip Revisions, Johnson & Johnson, Metal on metal hip, Total Hip Replacement Tagged: arthritis, Cobalt chrome, Cobalt poisoning, DePuy, DePuy ASR Hip, DePuy ASR™ Hip Resurfacing System, Food & Drug Administration, Health, Hip Replacement, hip replacement failure, hip resurfacing, Human settlement, Johnson, Johnson & Johnson, Medical device, New York TImes, Patient, Product Liability

Consumer Reports Urges a Lemon Law For Joint Replacements

earlstevens58 — Thu, 17 Oct 2013 21:30:03 +0000

Consumer Reports Urges a Lemon Law For Joint Replacements

by Christy Rakoczy, a J.D.

Manufacturers of hip and knee replacement products made many promises to consumers. This is especially true of DePuy Orthopaedics, Stryker, Zimmer and other manufacturers of the new generation of joint replacement products largely marketed as medical devices that would last longer and provide more flexibility than traditional joint replacement solutions.

Unfortunately, the marketing for many of the new hip replacement products may have turned out to be a lot of hype. In fact, many of the hip replacement products that came on the market in recent years not only fail to last longer but actually appear to have higher failure rates and may cause serious complications for many patients. The extensive problems that patients allege they’ve experienced has even caused Consumer Reports to call for a “lemon law,” on replacement joints.

Consumer Reports Calls for a Warranty On Artificial Hips and Knees

Consumers Union, the policy arm of Consumer Reports, argues that medical device manufacturers should give consumers a warranty on hip and knee replacement products, promising to replace the medical devices at no costs. This suggestion comes at a time when as many as 20 percent of all hip replacement procedures and 10 percent of all knee replacement procedures each year are revision surgeries that are necessary because of problems with the implanted artificial joint.

Consumer Reports believes a warranty would both be fairer to patients who need to undergo repeated surgeries and would prompt medical device manufacturers to make sure their products are safer and more durable.

While this idea has merit as a method of protecting customers, unfortunately a warranty may not be enough. Those whose artificial joints fail often experience significant pain and serious medical complications. A no-cost revision surgery wouldn’t compensate the victims of defective medical devices for these other losses, but a product liability claim can and does allow patients to take action for defective hip and knee replacement devices.

Patients Have Rights When Hip and Knee Products are Defective

A large part of the reason revision surgeries have become so common in recent years is that many of the newer hip replacement products are metal-on-metal devices that were brought to the market under a special FDA rule.

The FDA’s 501(K) clearance rules allow manufacturers to produce and sell medical devices with a fast-tracked approval process and minimal testing provided there are substantially similar devices on the market already. Unfortunately, many of the devices brought to market under these rules have now been recalled when it turned out the products weren’t so safe after all.

DePuy Orthopaedics, for example, instituted a voluntary recall of its ASR™ Hip System after data from a UK joint replacement registry indicated a higher-than-average failure rate. The Stryker Rejuvenate and ABG II Modular-Neck Hip Systems were also recalled because of high failure rates.

The FDA continues to review the safety and efficacy record of metal on metal hip implants. The agency continues to receive adverse event reports with regard to the devices. Commonly alleged problems include:

Aseptic loosening
Infection
Bone loss
Metallosis (a/k/a “metal poisoning”)
The formation of pseudo tumors
Decreased range of motion and limited mobility
Pain

Patients who experience these complications deserve to have the manufacturer of their defective device pay for revision surgery. This is not all they deserve, though, and a warranty allowing for a no-cost revision procedure doesn’t go far enough. Victims whose lives are affected by defective medical products should also be compensated for time missed from work; for pain and suffering; for emotional distress and for any reduction they experience in their quality of life.

Bio:

Christy Rakoczy, a J.D. from the University of California, is a legal writer and advocate for consumer rights and patient safety. You can read more of her work on the Stryker hip implants, including recall information, complications, and ongoing legal action, at strykerhiprecall.co.

CIHI Study Reveals Problems with Metal-on-Metal Hip Implants (earlsview.com)

Filed under: Cobalt chrome, Cobalt Poisoning, Cobaltism, DePuy ASR Hip, DePuy Hip Litigation, Hip Replacement, Hip Revisions, Johnson & Johnson, Metal on metal hip, Stryker, Stryker ABGII Modular Femoral Stem, Stryker Hip Implant Recall, Stryker profits, Stryker rejuvenate hip, Stryker ShapeMatch, Stryker Trident Hip Recall, Stryker Trident Hip Replacement System, Suffering, Total Hip Replacement Tagged: Consumer Reports, DePuy, Hip Replacement, hip replacement products, India, joint replacement, knee replacement, Medical device, metallosis, Stryker Hip Replacements, surgery, University of California

FiDA Failed Implant Device Alliance: Exposed! : Secret Medical Device Payments to Doctors

earlstevens58 — Sun, 06 Oct 2013 00:02:55 +0000

FiDA Failed Implant Device Alliance: Exposed! : Secret Medical Device Payments to Doctors.

Exposed! : Secret Medical Device Payments to Doctors

Let the Sunshine In! New Law EndsSecret Drug Industry Payments & Gifts to Doctors

The Women’s Health Activist

September/October 2013

By Wells Wilkinson FiDA highlight

On August 1, 2013, a new law went into effect that’s intended to protect patients and improve the public perception of medicine and the health care system. No, it’s not the new health care system, sometimes called “Obamacare.” But it was enacted as part of health care reform. ThePhysician Payments Sunshine Act (PPSA), originally proposed by Senators Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Ed Kohl (D-WI), is intended to disclose any conflicts of interest arising from drug and device industries’ financial relationships with, or marketing to, physicians.

Lead legislative sponsor and champion Sen. Grassley praised the final implementation of the PPSA, saying: “Disclosure brings about accountability, and accountability will strengthen the credibility of medical research, the marketing of ideas and, ultimately, the practice of medicine.”¹

The law creates the “Open Payments Program,” which requires the drug and device industry to record, and report to the federal government, nearly every payment or gift to any doctor or teaching hospital. The Federal government will make this information public in a searchable on-line database beginning on September 30, 2014; the database will be updated by June 30^th each year thereafter.

Read the full article here – click here.

The piece of Obamacare that Dems wouldn’t mind giving up (tv.msnbc.com)
Medical devices are in need of a health check following. (blogblooms.wordpress.com)
What’s All This Federal Fuss Over An Obscure Medical Device Tax? (commonhealth.wbur.org)
Medical Devices Secured Against Hackers by Using Heartbeats as Passwords (news.softpedia.com)
Could New Tracking Codes on Medical Implants Save Lives? (scienceworldreport.com)
Here’s What the House Voted on to Avoid a Gov’t Shutdown – and How It Could Affect Obamacare (theblaze.com)
The Outlook for Medical Devices in Central & Eastern Europe (prweb.com)
Your Worst Fears About Your Very Personal Info (txwclp.org)
FDAnews Announces Cybersecurity Threats to Medical Devices Webinar, Oct. 18 (hispanicbusiness.com)
EU Improves Safety of Medical Devices After PIP Breast Implant Scandal (medindia.net)

Filed under: Cobalt Poisoning, Hip Replacement, Hip Revisions, Metal on metal hip, Total Hip Replacement Tagged: Chuck Grassley, European Union, Food and Drug Administration, Health care reform, Medical device, Obamacare, Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, UNited States

Scott’s Biomet agony – and now relief with it gone…

earlstevens58 — Mon, 30 Sep 2013 07:44:07 +0000

Good Morning Earl,

I have been battling my Biomet Magnum M2A hip since it was implanted some eight years ago.. On August 28, 2013 I had that hip replaced with a ceramic device. The relief has been INCREDIBLE!

During the past eight years I have dealt with pain 24/7 and tried everything imaginable (including more than 40 outpatient pain blocks!) all to no avail. I’ve spent countless hours in doctor’s offices, doing various types of physical therapy, filling out forms, waiting for prescriptions to be filled…… you name it. I’ve lost my career, and have not earned one dime of income during this time. Most of my life was spent sitting atop the bed with my leg elevated. That-plus pain medication-was my only way of obtaining any relief. Even then the pain never stopped.

I want to describe this pain in detail. Any number of sensations appeared in various order with no real rhyme or reason. The worst was the sensation of my femur throbbing-just like a toothache inside of the bone. I also experienced stinging and burning in my thigh and buttock on that side. Often, my thigh would feel three times the normal size-as if were going to burst like a water balloon. I had pain behind my knee, pain in my calf muscle, pain in my shin…. even my toes! (Every single symptom is gone and yet only the articulation was revised; my surgeon found the implant in my femur to be solid and therefore he did not replace that part. I still have some surgical pain which is normal at this stage.)

In recovery, my surgeon was beaming as he explained what he found during my replacement surgery: The Biomet hip was covered with scar tissue (and a lot of fluid) so thick that he described it as a “rind” while cutting his way through. The scar tissue was so extensive that he repeatedly lengthened my incision for additional access. Apparently this scar tissue had entrapped many nerves, thus causing the misery I had endured for so long. Most importantly: this scar tissue and accompanying fluid did not appear on any x-ray, bone scan, MRI, CAT scan, etc. I was evaluated by four different Orthopedic surgeons over the years, yet the results were always the same: My implant was perfectly aligned, there was no apparent loosening, no cysts, no infection, etc. Obviously no surgeon would commit to operating on a patient who had no apparent problems. Finally I found a surgeon who listened carefully and took a more aggressive course of action. Thanks to a simple hip aspiration, within a few weeks I was on my way to an end of eight painful years. I would be happy to share additional details with anyone else that might benefit from my experience.

Regards

Scott

Time: September 26, 2013 at 12:38 am

Better Quality of Life After a Hip Replacement Surgery (biometlawyer.wordpress.com)
Biomet Hip Lawsuits News: Number of Cases Increases in Federal Courts, Reports Rottenstein Law Group LLP (businesslawdaily.net)
Biomet Hip Lawsuits News: Judge Denies Biomet Motion to Dismiss Lawsuit, Reports Rottenstein Law Group LLP (businesslawdaily.net)
Biomet Hip Lawsuits Update: Almost 600 Lawsuits Pending in Federal Court, Reports Rottenstein Law Group LLP (businesslawdaily.net)

Filed under: Biomet, Biomet Hip Lawsuit, Biomet Hip Replacement, Biomet Magnum Hip, Cobalt chrome, Cobalt Poisoning, Hip Replacement, Hip Revisions, Metal on metal hip, Total Hip Replacement Tagged: Doctor's office, Earl, femur, Health, Medicine, pain, Pain management, Physical therapy

CIHI Study Reveals Problems with Metal-on-Metal Hip Implants

earlstevens58 — Mon, 23 Sep 2013 21:38:46 +0000

CIHI Study Reveals Problems with Metal-on-Metal Hip Implants

On July 18, 2013, the Canadian Institute for Health Information (CIHI) released the results of a study aimed at examining the longevity of artificial hip implants. Researchers studied outcomes of more than 59,000 hip replacement surgeries performed in Canada between 2003 and 2011. Data was included from all the Canadian provinces, with the exception of Quebec.

Researchers found that patients who were implanted with a large-diameter modular metal-on-metal hip implant device had a 5.9% chance of needing revision surgery within five years after the original procedure. Patients who received other types of hip implant devices had a 2.7% chance of requiring revision surgery during that same time frame.

Cost of revision hip replacement surgery

According to researchers, cost and recovery time for revision surgery is much higher and much longer than patients’ original hip replacement surgery. CIHI says that patients having revision surgery remain in the hospital 17% longer and pay 45% more than they did during their initial hospitalization and rehabilitation.

Who gets metal-on-metal hip implants?

The majority of patients receiving metal-on-metal hip implants were men under the age of 55. Similar numbers have been found in studies conducted in Australia and the U.K. The metal-on-metal implants were originally marketed to this patient demographic, since they were highly touted for their increased mobility and durability.

“Metal-on-metal hip replacement implants were generally considered to be the most suitable implants for younger, more active patients who were traditionally at higher risk of repeat surgery due to the wear and tear they place on the implant,” Dr. Eric Bohm, orthopedic surgeon from the Concordia Hip and Knee Institute, was quoted as saying in the Canadian Institute of Health report.

Unfortunately, the choice to go with a metal-on-metal hip implant did not prove beneficial for some of those patients, as complications with the implants resulted in pain, reduced mobility and the need for subsequent surgery. In addition, CBC/Radio-Canada recently reported that some patients receiving these implants suffered tissue damage around the joint, after metal particles entered surrounding tissue and the bloodstream.

Legal trouble for makers of hip devices

In 2010, Johnson & Johnson issued a worldwide recall of its iconic metal-on-metal stars, DePuy ASR XL Acetabular System and the ASR Resurfacing System. A few short months after the recall was issued, the first class action lawsuit involving DePuy devices was filed in Quebec Superior Court.

Complaints about the devices include misalignment, loosening of the joint, dislocation, fracture, and metal debris around the joint. Plaintiffs have claimed that DePuy was aware of the potential problems with their devices, but refused to pull the devices from the market before patients were injured by the implants.

It is estimated that as many as 4,000 DePuy ASR hip implants have been used in Canadian patients. Over 37,000 of the devices were implanted in patients in the United States where the device manufacturer is also facing widespread and growing litigation.

Devices remain in wide use

Researchers in this recent study primarily focused on the large-diameter modular device. These devices feature a metal ball that fits inside a larger-than-normal metal socket. The purpose of the design was to improve mobility in younger, more active patients. Unfortunately, some surgeons have found the design is also more sensitive to malposition, which can increase the risk of metal particles rubbing off the device and entering the bloodstream.

The use of metal-on-metal hip implants appeared to peak between 2007 and 2008, but has been gradually decreasing since that time. Researchers in this study found the metal-on-metal devices only represented around 10% of the total number of devices examined. Metal-on-plastic devices were used in nearly three-fourths of the surgeries studied, and continue to be a popular choice for surgeons and patients today with seemingly fewer complications.

Bio:

Lance Andrews writes for Injury Lawyer News, where he reports on the effects of dangerous drugs and medical devices as well as recalled products. He is committed raising awareness about these issues to protect patient safety and consumer rights. His unique point of view comes from a combined education in journalism and medical studies.

Hire a Hip Implant Lawyer for Getting a Better Advice! (defectivekneeimplant.wordpress.com)
DePuy Hip Replacement (csengerilaw.wordpress.com)
Shouldn’t Hip & Knee Replacements Come With Warranties? (consumerist.com)
Victims of Faulty DePuy Pinnacle Hip Implants Seek Compensation for Injuries (pinnaclelawsuit.typepad.com)
America – the land of the brave and “ripped off”… (earlsview.com)
Judge Agrees to Exclude 2010 Recall From a DePuy ASR Federal Trial (depuyasrnewsandupdates.wordpress.com)
J&J Said to Weigh $3 Billion Settlement of Its Hip Implant Cases (bloomberg.com)
Hip Implant Complaints Increased Largely (depuyrecall.typepad.com)
In Wake of Stryker Lawsuits, FDA Advises Caution Over All Metal-on-Metal Hip Replacement Implants (pastry07mile.wordpress.com)
California Man Has Elevated Cobalt Levels and Possible Need for Revision Surgery After His Biomet Hip Implant Failed, Alleges Lawsuit Filed by Parker Waichman LLP (virtual-strategy.com)

Filed under: Cobalt chrome, Cobalt Poisoning, DePuy ASR Hip, Hip Replacement, Hip Revisions, Johnson & Johnson, Metal on metal hip, Total Hip Replacement Tagged: Canadian Institute for Health Information, DePuy, Hip Replacement, Johnson, Quebec, Quebec Superior Court, surgery, UNited States

Frans story – DePuy ASR and then Blood Cancer

earlstevens58 — Sun, 28 Jul 2013 00:54:22 +0000

I had a Depuy Pinnacle (MOM) total hip replacement in Dec. 2007 due to osteoarthritis at the age of 56. I was told that metal on metal was the preferred implant since I was young, thin and fit. In fact, this remarkable implant might even last my lifetime!

Eighteen months later, I was diagnosed with level one chronic lymphocytic leukemia.

I had every test imaginable regarding the leukemia and there were chromosomal abnormalities or deletions; however, never having a baseline study, it would be a stretch to say that there were changes.

A friend alerted me to the dangers of cobalt and chromium poisoning in 2012 and I requested the blood test, yet my surgeon did not encourage it as I was not symptomatic with hip issues. Both minerals tested were elevated but I was told they were not dangerously high at the time.

One year later, I requested to have the mineral blood test again so the results would be available for my annual appointment. Levels had risen significantly and I was having groin pain, hip pain and stability issues.

The orignial surgeon suggested a total hip resurfacing at some point, but certainly immediate surgery was not emphasized. I went for another opinion and that surgeon made room in his surgery schedule that week so that the Depuy Pinnancle could be removed.

My question is this: Are there others with metal on metal hip implants who then were diagnosed with blood cancer? I find it more than coincidental, yet when I ask medical professionals they state that there are no definitive studies linking the two.

DePuy Defective Hip Implant Claims | eLocal (elocallawyers.com)
Hip Replacement Lawsuits (hipreplacementlawsuits.wordpress.com)
DePuy ASR Hip Implant Lawsuit Filed by Wright & Schulte on Behalf of Texas Man Who Alleges His Serious Hip Injuries Were Caused by Defective Design of ASR Hip Implant (prweb.com)
Hip Replacement Recall (ehipreplacementrecall.wordpress.com)
Experts Advise Patients with MoM Hips to Undergo Blood Tests (hothealthnews.wordpress.com)
Fighting Rare Blood Cancers (23andme.com)
Lawmakers Mull over Actions for Hip Implant Safety (hipimplantlawyer.wordpress.com)
The New Design of DePuy ASR Hip (depuyrecall.typepad.com)
DePuy Hip Replacement Failure Rate (depuyrecall.typepad.com)
US Drug Watchdog Now Urges All DePuy Pinnacle Hip Implant Recipients To Call Them About A Blood Test To See If This Metal Hip Implant Has Failed-Time Is Of The Essence (prweb.com)

Filed under: Cobalt chrome, Cobalt Poisoning, Cobaltism, DePuy ASR Hip, DePuy Hip Litigation, Hip Replacement, Hip Revisions, Johnson & Johnson, Metal on metal hip, Total Hip Replacement Tagged: baseline study, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, DePuy, Food and Drug Administration, groin pain, Health, Hematological malignancy, Hip implants, Hip Replacement, Johnson, Medicine, osteoarthritis, pinnancle, total hip resurfacing

Stuart Cain speaks out re DePuy Hell – Meet The Press, Episode 22, Sunday July 21 | News.com.au

earlstevens58 — Thu, 25 Jul 2013 20:43:07 +0000

Meet The Press, Episode 22, Sunday July 21 | News.com.au.

Stuart Cain talks about his horrific time post DePuy ASR revision.

Click here

Here is his interview/article from the SUnday Telegraph too.

Click on this link below:

Stuart Cain Sunday Telegraph Article

Filed under: Cobalt chrome, Cobalt Poisoning, Cobaltism, DePuy ASR Hip, Hip Replacement, Hip Revisions, Johnson & Johnson, Metal on metal hip, Total Hip Replacement Tagged: arthritis, Barack Obama, Cobalt chrome, Cobalt poisoning, David Gregory, DePuy, DePuy ASR Hip, DePuy ASR™ Hip Resurfacing System, depuy hip recall, hip resurfacing, Johnson, Meet the Press, Music and Audio, Press, Tavis Smiley, UNited States

GOOD NEWS —- Smith & Nephew Hip Lawsuit News: Illinois Federal Judge Rejects Preemption in Smith & Nephew Hip Replacement Case, Bernstein Liebhard LLP Reports – Watch List News

earlstevens58 — Thu, 25 Jul 2013 12:46:45 +0000

Smith & Nephew Hip Lawsuit News: Illinois Federal Judge Rejects Preemption in Smith & Nephew Hip Replacement Case, Bernstein Liebhard LLP Reports – Watch List News.

Smith & Nephew Hip Lawsuit News: Illinois Federal Judge Rejects Preemption in Smith & Nephew Hip Replacement Case, Bernstein Liebhard LLP Reports

July 24th, 2013

The Firm is currently investigating Smith & Nephew hip recall lawsuits on behalf of individuals who suffered metallosis, premature device failure and other complications allegedly associated with Smith & Nephew’s optional metal liner component for its R3 Acetabular Hip Replacement System.

New York, New York (PRWEB) July 24, 2013

A federal judge in Illinois presiding over a Smith & Nephew hip lawsuit has ruled that the Plaintiff’s claims of negligence and strict liability involving alleged quality control issues in the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing System may go forward, Bernstein Liebhard LLP reports. In an Order dated July 22nd, Judge Joan H. Lefkow of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois rejected Smith & Nephew’s assertions that the claims were preempted by federal law. The Birmingham Hip Resurfacing System may be used with the optional metal liner component for the R3 Acetabular Hip Replacement System, which was the subject of a Smith & Nephew hip recall in June 2012.* (Tillman v. Smith & Nephew Inc., No. 1:12-cv-04977 (N.D. Ill.))

“We continue to hear from individuals who have suffered serious complications, allegedly due to Smith & Nephew hip replacements. We are encouraged by the decision in this case,” says Bernstein Liebhard LLP, a nationwide law firm representing the victims of defective drugs and medical devices. The Firm is currently offering free Smith & Nephew hip lawsuit evaluations to patients who suffered serious complications, including metallosis and premature device failure, allegedly due to the recalled R3 metal liner component.

Smith & Nephew Hip Recall

The Smith & Nephew hip recall was announced in June 2012, due to the high failure rates associated with the optional metal liner component for the R3 Acetabular System. According to the Food & Drug Administration (FDA), the R3 metal liner is not cleared for use with the R3 Acetabular System, a total hip replacement system, but has been approved for use with the Birmingham Hip Resurfacing System.*

According to a report from Reuters, yearly revision rates among recipients of the recalled Smith & Nephew hip replacement device were above the rate Britain’s National Institute for Health and Clinical Evidence deems acceptable. Patients fitted with the device may be at risk for numerous complications, including infections, fractures and dislocations. However, Smith & Nephew has maintained that there is no evidence that the metal liner has caused metallosis, or increased metal debris in the body.**

Victims of serious complications allegedly associated with the Smith & Nephew hip recall may be entitled to compensation for their medical care, pain and suffering, and other damages. Additional information about filing a Smith & Nephew hip lawsuit is available at Bernstein Liebhard’s website. To arrange for a free, no obligation legal review of your case, please call 800-511-5092 today.

*fda.gov/MedicalDevices/ProductsandMedicalProcedures/ImplantsandProsthetics/MetalonMetalHipImplants/ucm241770.htm, FDA, June 1, 2012

**reuters.com/article/2012/06/01/us-smithnephew-hip-idUSBRE85010J20120601, Reuters, June 1, 2012

About Bernstein Liebhard LLP

Bernstein Liebhard LLP is a New York-based law firm exclusively representing injured persons in complex individual and class action lawsuits nationwide since 1993, including those who have been harmed by dangerous drugs, defective medical devices and consumer products. The firm has been named by The National Law Journal to the “Plaintiffs’ Hot List,” recognizing the top plaintiffs’ firms in the country, for the past 10 consecutive years.

Bernstein Liebhard LLP

10 East 40th Street

New York, New York 10016

800-511-5092

ATTORNEY ADVERTISING. © 2013 Bernstein Liebhard LLP. The law firm responsible for this advertisement is Bernstein Liebhard LLP, 10 East 40th Street, New York, New York 10016, 800-511-5092. Prior results do not guarantee or predict a similar outcome with respect to any future matter.

###

Contact Information:

Felecia L. Stern, Esq.

Bernstein Liebhard LLP

info(at)consumerinjurylawyers(dot)com

http://www.consumerinjurylawyers.com

For the original version on PRWeb visit: http://www.prweb.com/releases/smith-nephew-hip-recall/smith-nephew-hip-lawsuit/prweb10960667.htm

Smith & Nephew Hip Lawsuit News: Illinois Federal Judge Rejects Preemption in Smith & Nephew Hip Replacement Case, Bernstein Liebhard LLP Reports (prweb.com)
Smith & Nephew Letter (earlsview.com)
Biomet Hip Implants Alleged Poor Design Lead to Serious Problems (defectivehips.wordpress.com)
Stryker Hip Recall Claims Move Forward With Issuance of New Case Management Order in New Jersey Litigation, Bernstein Liebhard LLP Reports (prweb.com)
Smith And Nephew Unveils New Hip Device (smithnephewhip.wordpress.com)
$20 Million Lawsuit on Damages from Hip Replacement: Now, AttorneyOne… (prweb.com)
Increasing Number of Lawsuits for Smith & Nephew (debooramoore.wordpress.com)
Hip Resurfacing an Alternative to Hip Replacement (hothealthnews.wordpress.com)
Hip Replacement Recall (ehipreplacementrecall.wordpress.com)

Filed under: Birmingham Hip Resurfacing, Cobalt chrome, Cobalt Poisoning, Hip Replacement, Hip Revisions, Metal on metal hip, Smith & Nephew, Smith & Nephew BHR Problems, Smith & Nephew Hip Recall, Smith & Nephew R3 Hip Liner Recall, Total Hip Replacement Tagged: arthritis, Cobalt chrome, Cobalt poisoning, Food & Drug Administration, Hip Replacement, hip resurfacing, Illinois, Limited liability partnership, Nephew, Smith, Smith & Nephew

Just Remember it is all Your Fault!!!

earlstevens58 — Fri, 19 Jul 2013 22:09:18 +0000

Just remember patients, this is actually your fault!

I have just read with great interest Howard’s response to the letter from Smith and Nephew regarding the Birmingham hip and after my recent experiences with the ASR there is something I wanted to share with everyone. Firstly for those here in Australia, I have been interviewed for the Sunday edition of News Ltd Newspapers (Sunday Mail in Qld, Sunday Telegraph in NSW, Sunday Herald Sun in Vic, etc.) and I believe the story is going nationwide as the interview came out of Canberra, I am also appearing on the Current Affairs program “Meet the Press” on Channel 10 on Sunday morning for a panel discussion which I am led to believe (speaking to the interviewer today) is about everything from approval failures to my experiences to medical company/surgeon ethics! So as this is live it should be interesting, for those outside of Australia it should be available on the web, I will (in conjunction with Earl of course) put up any links after the event that may help everyone to view these.

But what I wanted to share and would be very interested in others experiences, is something that my surgeon told me last week and also after reading Howard’s letter response I think it is even more important. Here in Australia the peak professional body for Orthopaedic Surgeons (apparently these people are ‘independent’ of any medical company or other organisation) is the Australian Orthopaedic Association (AOA). The AOA has recently sent a memo to their members with the following directive:

“When discussing with patients the issue of elevated Cobalt/Chromium levels, please be mindful of the following points. Up until now elevated levels of these two elements have been referred to as ‘Cobalt/Chromium Toxicity’ or ‘Cobalt/Chromium Poisoning’. It is advised that in the current climate, that this should now be referred to as ‘Cobalt/Chromium Sensitivity’! In other words this ‘independent’ organisation is doing everything in their power to protect the medical companies who have produced these products by taking the inference of toxicity or poisoning out of the statement and replacing it with a ‘reaction’ type word in other words, it isn’t our fault for poisoning your bodies, it is your fault for actually daring to react to that poisoning!! Apart from being dumbfounded when I heard this, I must admit that I did very quickly become angry, I would be very interested to hear if anyone else has experienced anything such as this (remembering that I was fortunate that my surgeon shared this with me as he was ‘disgusted’ by the AOA’s actions). So as far as they are concerned the Strokes, Blood Poisoning, Kidney Failure, Poor Bone/Fracture Healing, Tissue Necrosis (death), Hearing/Sight loss/deterioration, just to name a few, are all actually our fault not theirs as our bodies reacted to the poison that was introduced to us, nothing at all to do with the fact that this stuff shouldn’t have been ‘roaming free’ within our systems in the first place!!

I hope everyone has a great weekend, I am looking forward to Sunday morning after 6 months of further declining health, pain and poor mobility I think keeping it ‘short and sweet’ will be my biggest challenge! I would be very interested to hear of others experiences regarding what I have written above and I will also be interested in feedback regarding the media stuff. I look forward to speaking to you all again soon!

Cheers,

Stu Cain

Smith & Nephew Letter (earlsview.com)
Hip Resurfacing an Alternative to Hip Replacement (hothealthnews.wordpress.com)
Smith And Nephew Unveils New Hip Device (smithnephewhip.wordpress.com)
DePuy Defective Hip Implant Claims | eLocal (elocallawyers.com)

Filed under: Cobalt chrome, Cobalt Poisoning, Cobaltism, DePuy ASR Hip, DePuy Hip Litigation, Hip Replacement, Hip Revisions, Johnson & Johnson, Metal on metal hip, Total Hip Replacement Tagged: Australia, australian orthopaedic association, chromium levels, chromium toxicity, Herald Sun, Meet the Press, Necrosis, peak professional body, Smith & Nephew, Smith and Nephew, Sunday, sunday herald sun, Sunday Mail, Sunday Telegraph

Earl's View » Metal on metal hip

The Myth of the Medical-Device Tax

The Myth of the Medical-Device Tax

Related articles

Johnson & Johnson Said to Agree to $4 Billion Settlement Over Hip Implants

Johnson & Johnson Said to Agree to $4 Billion Settlement Over Hip Implants

Published: November 12, 2013

The tentative plan, which must win court approval, represents one of the largest payouts for product liability claims involving a medical device.

Related articles

Consumer Reports Urges a Lemon Law For Joint Replacements

Consumer Reports Urges a Lemon Law For Joint Replacements

Bio:

Related articles

FiDA Failed Implant Device Alliance: Exposed! : Secret Medical Device Payments to Doctors

Exposed! : Secret Medical Device Payments to Doctors

Related articles

Scott’s Biomet agony – and now relief with it gone…

Related articles

CIHI Study Reveals Problems with Metal-on-Metal Hip Implants

CIHI Study Reveals Problems with Metal-on-Metal Hip Implants

Cost of revision hip replacement surgery

Who gets metal-on-metal hip implants?

Legal trouble for makers of hip devices

Devices remain in wide use

Bio:

Related articles

Frans story – DePuy ASR and then Blood Cancer

Related articles

Stuart Cain speaks out re DePuy Hell – Meet The Press, Episode 22, Sunday July 21 | News.com.au

Here is his interview/article from the SUnday Telegraph too.

Related articles

GOOD NEWS —- Smith & Nephew Hip Lawsuit News: Illinois Federal Judge Rejects Preemption in Smith & Nephew Hip Replacement Case, Bernstein Liebhard LLP Reports – Watch List News

Smith & Nephew Hip Lawsuit News: Illinois Federal Judge Rejects Preemption in Smith & Nephew Hip Replacement Case, Bernstein Liebhard LLP Reports

Related articles

Just Remember it is all Your Fault!!!

Just remember patients, this is actually your fault!

Related articles