As New Jersey and Philadelphia DePuy hip recall lawyers, we are frequently asked whether or not DePuy hip recall patients can trust their orthopaedic surgeons to give them honest, fair, and impartial advice regarding the recall. After all, this orthopaedic surgeon was the one who initially recommended the patient receive the DePuy product in the first place. However, while a small percentage of orthopaedic surgeons may have initially been offered financial incentives by DePuy and Johnson & Johnson to utilize the implant that has since been recalled, many surgeons likely chose the implant based on DePuy’s marketing of the benefits of its product. Also, while some orthopaedic surgeons may have accepted honorarium or speaking engagements money from the Johnson & Johnson subsidiary in the past, now that the implant has been recalled, it is unlikely that any orthopaedic surgeon would jeopardize his or her career by accepting further monetary compensation to promote a recalled product.
Seek a Second Opinion
As New Jersey and Philadelphia DePuy hip recall lawyers, we are telling our clients that they should give their own orthopaedic surgeon the benefit of the doubt and listen to what the surgeon has to say about their options. Of course, we are also recommending that all patients get a second, independent medical opinion from another orthopaedic surgeon regarding the nature and extent of their current condition, whether or not they have osteolysis, and whether the patient should obtain blood tests to determine the presence of metallic debris. This second opinion should also cover what type of implant will be utilized during the second surgery.
While all DePuy replacement recipients should follow their orthopaedic surgeon’s medical advice, most DePuy hip recall lawyers are recommending that any doctor that insists on using a DePuy implant be looked upon with skepticism. The bottom line: final choice of which hip implant (and which orthopaedic surgeon) always belongs to the patient.
DePuy Hip Recall Lawyers in New Jersey and Philadelphia
If you are the recipient of a defective DePuy hip implant, contact the Mininno Law Office for a free case evaluation. You may also call for a free consultation at (856) 833-0600 in New Jersey, or (215) 567-2380 in Philadelphia. The defective product attorneys at the Mininno Law Office are prepared to earn you the full and fair compensation that you need and deserve. Don’t be fooled by DePuy insurance claims adjusters who claim to be on your side. Seek out an attorney to fight for your rights.
Fortunately, the medical future involving artificial joint replacement looks bright. Notwithstanding the failure of the DePuy hip implant, scientists, metallurgists, and researchers are constantly searching for better options for joint replacement patients. Unfortunately, companies like DePuy Orthopaedics and Johnson & Johnson have a financial incentive to be the first manufacturer to get their products on the market. As such, it must be questioned whether this profit motive causes manufacturers to put medical devices on the market before conducting long term studies about the product. In the case of DePuy, it appears that there were no long term studies regarding the wear and tear of the implant before the product was released into the market. Perhaps DePuy and Johnson & Johnson hoped that the chromium and cobalt metal parts in the hip implant would not pose a problem to potential patients.
As a result, Judge Katz is responsible for coordinating all pretrial discovery and litigation concerning the nature of DePuy’s defective hip implant to promote judicial economy, prevent duplication of the same discovery in hundreds of cases, prevent the potential for hundreds of judges each individually ruling on the same issue, and to prevent inconsistent judicial rulings from these judges. The DePuy hip recall multi-district litigation (MDL) is a great way to streamline the DePuy hip recall litigation, conserve judicial resources, and save the parties money.
Most DePuy hip recall patients have had a single DePuy hip replacement. However, many times, an orthopaedic patient will require both hips to be replaced in a surgery called a bilateral hip replacement surgery. Unfortunately, for those patients who have had a bilateral hip-replacement surgery with the recalled DePuy hip implant, the recall is twice as troubling because these patients will require more extensive surgery to remove the two DePuy hips.
As a New Jersey and Philadelphia
One of the questions patients have asked is, “What is the defect that is causing these implants to fail?” Not surprisingly, DePuy Orthopaedics is not telling its DePuy hip implant patients anything of substance regarding why these DePuy hip implants are failing and why they have issued this hip recall. But, DePuy won’t be able to keep its secrets for long. Ultimately, because of the lawsuits, DePuy representatives will have to testify, under oath, about the hip recall. Then, DePuy hip implant patients will finally learn the truth.
If you are a victim of the 
DePuy Orthopaedics, a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson, marketed its DePuy ASR XL Acetabular Hip Imlplant System and ASR Hip Resurfacing Systems worldwide, and all are included in the recall. In December of 2010, about 1,500 Canadian patients who had DePuy hip replacements filed a DePuy class action lawsuit in the courts in Quebec, Calgary, Alberta, Halifax, Nova Scotia, and Montreal. DePuy hip recall lawyers in Canada are helping these DePuy hip recall claimaints. It is likely that other DePuy hip implant patients in Europe will soon be filing similar class actions as a result of the DePuy hip recall.
As we have posted previously, all hip recall lawyers will explain that a partial or total hip implant is not a cure for hip pain. However, what makes this Depuy hip recall so unusual is the extraordinarily high failure rate as compared to DePuy’s hip implant competitors. In fact, the medical research which lead to the hip recall has shown that between 12 and 13 percent of Depuy hip implant patients will require a hip replacement revision surgery within five years of receiving the replacement.