Setting the DePuy Revision Knee Terminology Straight

DePuy Knee Lawsuit News

DePuy addresses the malfunctioning DePuy Attune Knee Replacement device by redesigning it and attempting to correct the fit

Monday, July 30, 2018 - On the one hand, DePuy Synthes is to be applauded for making the effort to redesign the DePuy Attune Knee Replacement Device, and to address its myriad of shortcomings. On the other hand, DePuy continues to hedge against admitting that the original DePuy knee failed to work as advertised or last the 20-30 years that they expected. The DePuy Revision knee's product description is veiled in marketing language that could mislead consumers into thinking that nothing was wrong with the original knee replacement device. To anyone who studies this subject, however, the language alludes to the exact reasons why the original knee did not work.

For example, studies indicate that an unacceptably high number of DePuy knee replacement devices "debond" (come unglued) at the point the tibia is inserted into the device's sleeve leading up to the artificial knee joint and thus require painful, dangerous and expensive revision surgery. The DePuy Revision knee describes this as "proprietary design features to address key challenges in revision knee arthroplasty'," without mentioning the debonding issue directly. Since DePuy knees are marketed to and implanted in senior citizens with osteoarthritis and osteoporosis, the condition of the tibia is sometimes insufficient to bear the load demanded of the artificial knee. Most DePuy knees simply do not fit properly due to a senior's bone loss, and the gap between the bone and the sleeve is filled with pieces of plastic called shims. The sleeve is then filled with glue to fill the gaps. Another point of deception is the way the myriad of DePuy knee adverse events are misrepresented by saying that the Revision knee enables surgeons" to manage a broad range of complex primary and revision knee procedures." Debonding and the resultant instability are the reasons why so many DePuy knees fail in the first place. DePuy simply says: "The system is designed to address bone defects, provide stability, provide enhanced fixation options, and deliver an efficient technique."

The need to completely redesign the DePuy Knee begs the question as to why, if the DePuy knee was not a faulty, malfunctioning, poorly conceived medical device, would a revision knee product be necessary? Those suffering from the pain of a faulty DePuy Knee question whether it would have been better for DePuy to voluntarily withdraw the knee from the market while the tibial debonding issues could be addressed and corrected. Instead, DePuy continued to sell the original device to more than 500,000 unsuspecting and trusting senior citizens. The origin DePuy Knee was brought to market under the FDA's 501 (k) fast-track program that permits a medical device to circumvent the cost, delays, and rigors of pre-market testing if it can be shown to be substantially similar to another medical device already on the market. Yes, it was similar, but the DePuy Knee was to be marketed to a completely different demographic, senior citizens whose bone compromised tibial bone structures demanded the DePuy Revision knee in the first place.

Those suffering from the pain and immobility of the original DePuy knee replacement are taking DePuy Synthes and their parent company Johnson & Johnson to court along with their DePuy knee replacement attorney to seek to hold the companies accountable for rushing a faulty medical device to market with inadequate prior testing.

More Recent DePuy Knee Lawsuit News:

No-Cost, No-Obligation DePuy Lawsuit Case Review If You or a Loved One Suffered from DePuy Knee Complications

Onder, Shelton, O'Leary & Peterson, LLC is a St. Louis personal injury law firm handling serious injury and death claims across the country. Its mission is the pursuit of justice, no matter how complex the case or strenuous the effort. Onder, Shelton, O'Leary & Peterson has represented clients throughout the United States in pharmaceutical and medical device litigation such as Pradaxa, Lexapro and Yasmin/Yaz, where the firm's attorneys held significant leadership roles in the litigation, as well as Actos, DePuy, Risperdal and others. The Onder Law Firm won $197 million in three talcum powder ovarian cancer lawsuits in St. Louis in 2016 and other law firms throughout the nation often seek its experience and expertise on complex litigation.