Over 300 patients sue over defective hip replacements

Hip replacement patients have begun a court battle for compensation over ‘defective’ implants that allegedly left them up to 100 times more likely to need the devices replaced.

More than 300 claimants are involved in a High Court fight against manufacturing company DePuy over allegations relating to their metal-on-metal implants.

It was alleged many of the patients had been injured and required further surgery after they were fitted with the implants.

The court was told patients fitted with DePuy’s Pinnacle Ultamet implants were up to 100 times more likely to need the joint replaced because they released metal particles which can cause muscle tissue to die.

More than 300 hip replacement patients are suing manufacturing DePuy fior ‘defective’ implants they had, which they claim left them more likely to need surgery and in pain 

Their complaints included pain, difficulty in walking, swelling and numbness or loss of sensation in the leg.

But while only 341 claimants are currently fighting the strict liability case, hundreds of thousands of the implants were sold worldwide before they were eventually discontinued.

It is understood that since 2002, when they went on the market in the UK, 12,000 of the implants were fitted in this country alone.

Speaking in court yesterday on the first day of the trial, Robin Oppenheim QC, for the claimants, said: ‘The implants were discontinued in 2013. Around 260,000 of them were sold worldwide until then.’

Mr Oppenheim also told the court that data from the National Joint Registry suggested patients with the Pinnacle Ultamet implants were around three to six times more likely to need further surgery after 10 years, compared to people with other implants.

And the same patients were around 40 to 100 times more likely to need another operation due to problems caused by metal leaking out specifically, compared to other implant recipients.

Mr Oppenheim said the claimants’ case is that the ‘products supplied to them were defective … and that this caused them personal injury including revision surgery in each case’.

He told the court: ‘A product is defective where it does not provide the safety which a person is entitled to expect.’

The trial, which is expected to continue until the end of January, could lead to hundreds more metal-on-metal claims against other manufacturers, which are understood to be on hold pending its outcome.

This stage of the trial, which is being heard by Mrs Justice Andrews, is to decide whether DePuy is ‘liable’.

DePuy is strongly denying any allegation of malpractice, saying they ‘have no greater responsibility than to the patients who use our products’. File image used 

Bozena Michalowska Howells, from the consumer law and product safety team at law firm Leigh Day, the lead solicitor for the Pinnacle metal-on-metal group litigation, said in a statement outside court that the claimants ‘believe that the Pinnacle device has failed to deliver on the level of safety they were entitled to expect.’

She said: ‘As a result of this failure, they have suffered pain and early revision surgery which we believe would have been avoided had they been implanted with a conventional hip product.’

Claimants are expected to begin giving evidence later on in the week, with at least one appearing via videolink.

A spokesperson from DePuy said: ‘At DePuy, we have no greater responsibility than to the patients who use our products.

‘The device is  backed by a strong record of clinical data showing reduced pain and restored mobility for patients suffering from chronic hip pain.

‘We are committed to the long-term defense of the allegations in this litigation.’

The case continues.

Read more at DailyMail.co.uk