<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
     xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
     xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
     xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
     xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
     xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
     xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
     xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
     xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
     xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/">
    <channel>
        <title><![CDATA[risks - Hodges Law, PLLC]]></title>
        <atom:link href="https://www.clayhodgeslaw.com/blog/tags/risks/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
        <link>https://www.clayhodgeslaw.com/blog/tags/risks/</link>
        <description><![CDATA[Hodges Law's Website]]></description>
        <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Mar 2026 20:44:34 GMT</lastBuildDate>
        
        <language>en-us</language>
        
            <item>
                <title><![CDATA[Depuy Knew About Metal-on-Metal Hip Risks Decades Ago: Documents]]></title>
                <link>https://www.clayhodgeslaw.com/blog/depuy-knew-about-metal-on-metal-hip-risks-long-ago-documents/</link>
                <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.clayhodgeslaw.com/blog/depuy-knew-about-metal-on-metal-hip-risks-long-ago-documents/</guid>
                <dc:creator><![CDATA[Clay Hodges]]></dc:creator>
                <pubDate>Wed, 26 Apr 2017 14:48:56 GMT</pubDate>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[Depuy ASR]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[Depuy Pinnacle]]></category>
                
                
                    <category><![CDATA[Artificial Hip]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[ASR]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[Depuy]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[documents]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[litigation]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[Metallosis]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[MoM]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[Pinnacle]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[risks]]></category>
                
                
                
                <description><![CDATA[<p>“What did they know and when did they know it?” When something goes wrong with a medical device, this eventually becomes the key question. Unfortunately for Depuy Orthopaedics (Depuy), a lot has gone wrong with its metal-on-metal (MoM) hip implants over the past ten years. And to make matters worse, recently released documents* show Depuy&hellip;</p>
]]></description>
                <content:encoded><![CDATA[
<p>“What did they know and when did they know it?” When something goes wrong with a medical device, this eventually becomes the key question. Unfortunately for Depuy Orthopaedics (Depuy), a lot has gone wrong with its metal-on-metal (MoM) hip implants over the past ten years. And to make matters worse, recently released documents* show Depuy knew it would have problems with its MoM hip implants decades ago.</p>



<p><em><strong>Depuy MoM Hip Implants: An Overview</strong></em>
</p>


<div class="wp-block-image alignright">
<figure class="is-resized"><a href="/static/2017/04/iStock-587512462-1.jpg"><img decoding="async" src="/static/2017/04/iStock-587512462-1-300x200.jpg" alt="Hip Replacement document." style="width:300px;height:200px"/></a></figure>
</div>


<p>Hip implants have been around for a long time. They can be made of various materials. Some older models use a polyethylene cup and a metal ball to create the artificial hip joint. While this combination works well, it’s not perfect. Engineers have looked for other materials to find a hip joint that can last longer with fewer adverse effects.</p>



<p>One attempted solution was to have both the cup and ball made out of metal, hence a metal-on-metal hip joint. However, the performance of these hip implants was even worse than joints that used polyethylene and metal. Problems with MoM hip implants included significant pain, bone loss, hip implant failure and <a href="/blog/metallosis-study-serious-health-problems-from-metal-on-metal-artificial-hips/">metallosis</a>.</p>



<p>As a result of these problems, thousands of lawsuits have sprung up, not just against Depuy, with its ASR and Pinnacle MoM implants, but other MoM hip implant manufacturers such as Biomet and Stryker. Many of the Depuy lawsuits have been consolidated into multi-district litigation, or <a href="/blog/definitions/">MDL</a>. A few initial bellwether trials involving the Depuy Pinnacle have resulted in massive verdicts against Depuy, <a href="/">which I wrote about here</a>.</p>



<p>Basically, things have not been looking good for Depuy. And they just got worse.</p>



<p>more
<em><strong>The Incriminating Documents</strong></em></p>



<p>The <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/11/hip-implant-maker-alerted-safety-fears-surgeon-told-borders/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Daily Telegraph</a> recently published a story, based on internal documents recently made available, that show Depuy actually knew it had serious problems with its MoM hip implants for years. The company deliberately took steps to ignore the problems. The released documents include:
</p>



<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>A <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3549260-PLT-00001-END-GAME.html#document/p1" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">paper written by Graham Isaac, Ph.D.,</a> discussing problems with MoM hip implants.</li>



<li>A <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3549256-PLT-00007-IRVING.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">letter from Dr. John F. Irving</a>, MD, to Depuy’s head of US marketing (Paul Berman).</li>



<li>Depuy corporate <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3549255-PLT-00048-1995-LITIGATION.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">meeting minutes</a> where Depuy executive met to discuss various topics, including MoM hip implants.</li>



<li><a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3549250-PLT-01499-NARGOL-CONCERNS.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Internal Depuy e-mail exchange</a> discussing MoM hip implant problems.</li>



<li>A <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3549253-PLT-00178-NORWICH-INVESTIGATION.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">July 2008 paper</a> on the topic of MoM hip implant problems.</li>
</ul>



<p>
These papers are especially incriminating because they show what Depuy knew (or should have known) and when they knew it.</p>



<p><em><strong>What Did Depuy Know?</strong></em>
</p>


<div class="wp-block-image alignleft">
<figure class="is-resized"><a href="/static/2017/04/scientist-1332343_1280.jpg"><img decoding="async" src="/static/2017/04/scientist-1332343_1280-300x200.jpg" alt="Two scientists looking through the same microscope." style="width:300px;height:200px"/></a></figure>
</div>


<p>In Dr. Graham Isaac’s paper, he explains how metal wear debris created from MoM hip joints were a serious problem due to poor design and manufacturing of the metal components. However, Dr. Isaac goes on to state that even with higher quality manufacturing and engineering techniques, the performance of MoM hip implants were still “as unpredictable as ever, working well for a period of time before suffering catastrophic breakdown…accompanied by a release of a large volume of debris.”</p>



<p>Dr. Isaac went on to conclude that metal-on-polyethylene hip implants performed significantly better than MoM implants. He also mentioned that using ceramics can produce hip implants that perform better than MoM hip implants.</p>



<p>In Dr. John Irving’s letter to Paul Berman, he spoke of his data collection which shows that Depuy’s MoM hip implants were dramatically underperforming other types of hip implants. When looking at metal-on-polyethylene hips from the last 10 years, Dr. Irving had a 1.2% failure rate, or eight revisions out of 660 hip implants.</p>



<p>Contrast this with Depuy’s MoM hip implants, where out of 262 implants, 31 required revision surgery. This was an 11.8% failure rate, almost 10<em><strong> </strong></em>times that of the conventional metal-on-polyethylene hip implants.</p>



<p>As if that wasn’t bad enough for Depuy, Dr. Irving complained about Depuy’s “lack of attention and head-in-the-sand response to this problem.” Dr. Irving went on to state that “<em><strong>these products are harming patients</strong></em>,” that he “did not feel Depuy [was] doing enough to understand the extent of the Pinnacle MoM hip disease” and it would be “unethical to continue to market the product.”</p>



<p>And in 2010, when Depuy finally starting taking action with its MoM hip implants, there was an e-mail exchange among Depuy executives and experts acknowledging a “link to a failure pattern of the ASR XI to the Pinnacle with 36 mm heads when used with metal liners” and that “the problem may be widespread” with “evidence of metal on metal and ceramic on metal failings.”</p>



<p>There was also the recognition that when a hip implant failed, it was “sometimes catastrophic.” One of the e-mails ended with the belief that Depuy should “investigate and manage this growing problem.”</p>



<p><em><strong>When Did Depuy Know?</strong></em></p>



<p>So these internal documents go to what Depuy knew, but how long did Depuy know this? Corporate minutes show <em><strong>Depuy most likely knew of the MoM</strong> <strong>risks in 1995</strong></em>, over twenty years ago.<em><strong> </strong></em>One of the meeting’s attendees, Dr. Paul Peters, noted that Depuy needed “to be cautious of the legal/litigation issues and lawyers, etc…perception of metal debris and metal-ion release.”</p>



<p>Additional notes from the corporate minutes indicated that Depuy observed the following problems with MoM hip implants:
</p>



<ul class="wp-block-list">
<li>Large volume of metal particles being released from the hip implants</li>



<li>Metal ions being released into the body</li>



<li>Poor wear results</li>



<li>Metal scratches in the components taking the form of peaks and valleys (as opposed to just valleys, which would result in the hip implant lasting longer).</li>
</ul>



<p>
<em><strong>What Does All this Mean?</strong></em></p>



<p>These documents appear to be from discovery in recent litigation concerning the Depuy Pinnacle hip implants, and they may have been used in Depuy Pinnacle bellwether trials. However, it’s somewhat unusual that these have been made public (by sources other than this website). The level of incriminating evidence contained in these documents is also quite unusual. If Depuy had all this information at its disposal more than twenty years ago, the injuries to patients who received the Depuy ASR and Depuy Pinnacle artificial hips in the years since then are particularly horrifying and egregious. I hope such bad publicity will further motivate Depuy to resolve its pending Depuy Pinnacle lawsuits as soon as possible.</p>



<p>*Note: The documents referenced and linked in this post are widely available from other news sources and were released prior to the publication of this article. <em>The Daily Telegraph</em> originally published “End Game” and other documents. I can not and do not verify the authenticity of these documents, nor can I confirm the truth of the statements made in the documents.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
            </item>
        
            <item>
                <title><![CDATA[Bair Hugger Forced-Air Warming Blankets May Cause Serious Infections]]></title>
                <link>https://www.clayhodgeslaw.com/blog/bair-hugger-surgical-blankets/</link>
                <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.clayhodgeslaw.com/blog/bair-hugger-surgical-blankets/</guid>
                <dc:creator><![CDATA[Clay Hodges]]></dc:creator>
                <pubDate>Thu, 20 Oct 2016 18:09:52 GMT</pubDate>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[Multidistrict Litigation]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[Other Product Cases]]></category>
                
                
                    <category><![CDATA[3M]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[Arizant]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[Bair Hugger]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[forced air]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[infection]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[joint replacement]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[MDL]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[risks]]></category>
                
                    <category><![CDATA[warming blanket]]></category>
                
                
                
                    <media:thumbnail url="https://clayhodgeslaw-com.justia.site/wp-content/uploads/sites/1408/2016/05/surgery-688380_1920.jpg" />
                
                <description><![CDATA[<p>At this point, it appears Arizant and 3M will vigorously defend themselves against the lawsuits filed over the Bair Hugger blanket. This hard line may soften, however, if more reports of serious infection occur, and if the medical research community determines an increased risk for infection after careful scientific study. If you suffered a serious infection after artificial hip or knee surgery which utilized the Bair Hugger blanket, you should probably have your case reviewed by a competent products liability attorney. </p>
]]></description>
                <content:encoded><![CDATA[
<p>The Bair Hugger forced-air warming blanket originally seemed like a great idea. Developed by an anesthesiologist, Dr. Scott Augustine, Bair Hugger was a forced-air warming blanket that is draped across a patient during and after surgery. The theory is that warm air against the body stimulates faster recovery and reduces bleeding. I believe the results have shown that Bair Hugger has sped recoveries for patients. Unfortunately, patients also began to suffer from infections. Some of these infections have been significant and caused serious injury in patients.</p>



<p>
In fact, Dr. Augustine has reversed field on his invention and now believes it should no longer be used during and after surgeries. He believes it is particularly dangerous for patients receiving medical device implants like artificial hips and knees, according to an article in <em>The New York Times</em>. The risk of infection is allegedly caused by the forced-air within the blanket which can spread bacteria often found in hospitals. Consumer advocates allege that the forced air pushes bacteria and other contaminants into open wounds of patients during and after surgery, which can increase risk of infections. Some individuals have suffered from very serious or even life-threatening infections. The scientific theory suggests that in artificial joint surgeries the immune system is not triggered as readily, such that bacteria introduced into the body is much more dangerous to the patient than under normal conditions. As a result, the bacteria in the patient’s body can cause much more damage and be life-threatening. In some cases, patients have had to undergo revision surgeries at the site of the artificial joint implantation; in rare cases, amputation was necessary because of the severe infection.</p>



<p>However, as I discuss below, Arizant Healthcare, Inc., the manufacturer of the Bair Hugger blanket, disputes that any increased risk of infection occurs with Bair Hugger. The medical device is still on the market and is still used in many surgeries.</p>



<p><em><strong>The Lawsuits</strong></em></p>



<p>Despite Arizant’s denials, people have suffered bad infections and have sued because of those injuries. Currently more than seven hundred (700) lawsuits have been filed against Arizant Healthcare and its parent company, 3M Company. These lawsuits allege injury from infection caused by the Bair Hugger blanket.</p>



<p><em><strong>Bair Hugger MDL Formed</strong></em></p>



<p>
In August 2015, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) formed a multi-district litigation site for Bair Hugger lawsuits. The MDL is situated in the United States District Court in Minnesota. The JPML chose Minnesota in large part because “3M and Arizant defendants are headquartered in Minnesota, and many witnesses and relevant documents are likely to be found there.” In addition, the December 11, 2015 JPML Order, which transferred the first Bair Hugger cases across the country to the Minnesota MDL, stated:</p>


<div class="wp-block-image alignright">
<figure class="is-resized"><a href="/static/2015/08/iStock_000050413018_Double-e1448650656797.jpg"><img decoding="async" src="/static/2015/08/iStock_000050413018_Double-e1448650656797.jpg" alt="Bair Hugger MDL" style="width:300px;height:200px"/></a></figure>
</div>


<p>“[W]e find that these actions involve common questions of fact, and that centralization will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses and promote the just and efficient conduct of this litigation. The actions share factual issues arising from allegations that plaintiffs developed serious infections during their orthopedic surgeries due to the introduction of contaminants into their open wounds as a result of the use of a Bair Hugger Forced Air Warming system (Bair FAW). Specifically, plaintiffs allege that the device is defective in at least two respects: (1) the device affects airflow in the operating room, causing bacteria from the operating room floor to be deposited into the surgical site; and (2) the internal airflow paths of the device’s blower can become contaminated with pathogens that can then be expelled into the operating room. The actions thus present common issues concerning the development, manufacture, testing, regulatory approval process, and marketing of the Bair FAW. Centralization will eliminate duplicative discovery, prevent inconsistent pretrial rulings on Daubert and other issues, and conserve the resources of the parties, their counsel, and the judiciary.”</p>



<p>On September 27, 2016, the <a href="http://www.mnd.uscourts.gov/MDL-Bair-Hugger/Orders/2016/2016-0927-PTO14-Plaintiff_Fact_Sheet_Protocol.pdf" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Bair Hugger MDL issued a pretrial order</a> approving a “Plaintiff Fact Sheet” (PFS) for all cases in the MDL. The Order requires all Plaintiffs to serve a completed Fact Sheet within ninety (90) days of filing a lawsuit in the MDL or transferring a lawsuit to the MDL. The PFS will essentially set out the essential facts of the specific case: complete contact information, the type of surgery, the dates of surgery and later infection, a description of the infection, the treatment required, the injuries that occurred, whether temporary or permanent, and other key information. The PFS is used often in MDLs to streamline discovery and to make review of each individual case more efficient.</p>



<p><em><strong>Bair Hugger Dangers Disputed by Manufacturer</strong></em>
</p>



<p>It is important for me to note again that Arizant Healthcare, the Bair Hugger blanket manufacturer, disputes reports that Bair Hugger poses an increased risk of infection to patients. In fact, Arizant and Dr. Augustine, the original inventor, have been engaged in bitter litigation over the years, both for monies owed and for alleged defamatory statements about the Bair Hugger.</p>



<p>3M Corporation purchased Arizant in 2010. So now the Bair Hugger blanket is 3M’s blessing and its curse. 3M released a statement years ago about the company’s disagreements with the inventor: “We believe Mr. Augustine’s allegations against forced-air warming stem from a personal vendetta and are baseless.”</p>



<p>At this point, it appears Arizant and 3M will vigorously defend themselves against the lawsuits filed over the Bair Hugger blanket. This hard line may soften, however, if more reports of serious infection occur, and if the medical research community determines an increased risk for infection after careful scientific study. If you suffered a serious infection after artificial hip or knee surgery which utilized the Bair Hugger blanket, you should probably have your case reviewed by a competent products liability attorney. Feel free to call me for more information: (919) 830-5602.</p>



<p>
<em>In re Bair Hugger Forced Air Warming Products Liability Litigation</em>, MDL No. 2666</p>
]]></content:encoded>
            </item>
        
    </channel>
</rss>