Andrew Sullo on Google+
Could You Be Affected by the District of Columbia Stryker Hip Statute of Limitations?
If you are one of the more than 20,000 recipients of a recalled Stryker Rejuvenate or ABGII, you could be entitled to file a District of Columbia Stryker Hip Lawsuit in order to recover damages for your injuries. Speaking to a District of Columbia Stryker hip lawyer has a number of benefits, however perhaps one of the most important revolves around the statute of limitations. The District of Columbia Stryker hip statute of limitations allows three years from the time the injury is discovered—or should have been discovered—for a civil cause of action to be filed.
Because the District of Columbia specifies that the statute begins from the time you discovered your injuries—or should have discovered the injuries—it is extremely important that you speak to a knowledgeable attorney as soon as possible to avoid missing your window of opportunity. Only a District of Columbia Stryker hip lawyer can determine exactly when the statute began in your case and can help you move forward with a District of Columbia Stryker hip lawsuit, while ensuring your rights are protected.
How the Stryker Hip Recall May Have Affected You
Just a few short months prior to the July, 2012 Stryker hip recall of the Rejuvenate and ABGII, Stryker sent out an Urgent Field Safety Notification to surgeons and hospitals, with information regarding potential risks associated with the two devices. Although Stryker stated that the Rejuvenate and ABGII were prone to generating excessive metal debris and that fretting and corrosion at the modular neck junction could lead to increased metal ion generation, they further claimed that there was only a “reported rate of less than one percent for revisions potentially associated with fretting and/or corrosion…” The reality of the Rejuvenate and ABGII revision rate would turn out to be vastly different from Stryker’s claim.
In fact, the Australian Registry found that in the very first year post-hip implant, patients were experiencing a failure rate of more than 11%. Later research would place that number anywhere from 8.1% to as high as 65%. Further, it now appears that Stryker was aware of the problems associated with the two devices soon after they were approved by the FDA in 2008 and 2009 and released to the public, largely in 2010. Several surgeons who were forced to remove the hip device from patients due to the serious health issues associated with the implants notified the FDA that in some cases, what appeared to be “black rust” could be seen on the removed hip implant.
In other cases, surgeons noted a strange milky substance in the hip tissues when the implant was removed. By the time the two implants were recalled, Stryker—despite early claims that these new designs would last much longer and provide more safety than other hip implants—was forced to recall the implants due to a much higher-than-normal rate of failure. Over 20,000 Rejuvenate and ABGII implants were sold, and at this point in time there are over 1,700 lawsuits pending against Stryker. Plaintiffs are claiming they developed severe metallosis symptoms or cobalt and chromium poisoning after receiving their Stryker implant. Metallosis symptoms include severe inflammation, chronic pain, loss of bone and tissue, total hip failure and the necessity of revision surgery. Metal poisoning can cause many serious health issues, including loss of vision and hearing, cardiovascular, neurological, renal, thyroid and gastrointestinal disorders, emotional issues, rashes, vertigo, memory loss and the development of pseudo-tumors.
Why Call a District of Columbia Stryker Hip Lawyer?
Attorneys who are involved in the District of Columbia Stryker hip lawsuits have done extensive research on the risks associated with the implants. Your District of Columbia Stryker hip lawyer will be your advocate, working hard to ensure you are properly compensated for your injuries. Your attorney has a solid understanding of the District of Columbia Stryker hip statute of limitations and will determine when your statute began running after reviewing your individual circumstances.