Every year, hundreds of thousands of people undergo surgery to receive a medical implant or device – a hip replacement, a spinal disc, a cardiac stent, a mesh implant – with the expectation that it will improve their quality of life. Most of the time, that is exactly what happens. But in a meaningful number of cases, the device itself becomes the source of the problem. A design flaw, a manufacturing error, or a material that degrades unpredictably inside the body can turn a routine procedure into a prolonged medical ordeal.
Patients in this situation often spend months or years being told their symptoms are normal, or that nothing is wrong, while the real cause goes unidentified. If you suspect that a medical device may be responsible for ongoing pain, illness, or declining function, this guide will walk you through the steps you can take to investigate, document, and protect your rights.
Recognize The Difference Between Normal Recovery And Device Failure
Pain after surgery is expected to follow a certain trajectory. It spikes early and then slowly starts to fade over the course of weeks. What you want to pay attention to are symptoms that begin or get worse long after you should have recovered.
Things like localized chronic inflammation in the tissue around an implant, sudden joint loosening in a joint that had been stable, or systemic symptoms, such as fatigue and central and peripheral neurologic signs are all signs you want to pay attention to. Metallosis, a condition in which metallic particles wear off an implant, has been described. Patients with metal-on-metal hip implants present with metal poisoning years after surgery, in the absence of an obvious surgical technical error.
If what you are experiencing doesn’t fit your surgeon’s time frame, take that time gap into the office with you. Be prepared to describe when the symptoms started, what they feel like, and if they are progressively worsening.
Preserve The Physical Device If Surgery Is Scheduled
If your doctor has recommended revision surgery to remove or replace the implant, the physical device is your most critical piece of evidence. Interestingly, hospitals deem explanted devices to be medical waste unless they are informed in advance to retain them.
Protect your rights by submitting a written request before surgery (send the letter via certified mail too) that the explanted device be preserved and either given to you or made available for legal inspection. Do not accept “we can provide photographs of the device.” You need the actual product. An explanted device can be tested by independent engineers to determine whether it failed due to a design defect or a manufacturing defect, which is the difference between a flaw in the original engineering and an error made during production.
Once you have your device identifiers, your medical timeline, and confirmation of any recall or MAUDE reports, consulting an attorney is the logical next step. A defective medical device lawsuit operates under product liability law – meaning the claim is against the manufacturer, not your surgeon.
Retrieve Your Device Identification Details
General information about your device won’t be enough to research it. You’ll need to know the manufacturer’s name, model number, and lot or serial number of the actual device that’s been implanted in your body.
First thing to do: Request your operative report and your implant card. The operative report will tell you what’s been put in your body, and the implant card should have been given to you by the hospital following your operation. If you didn’t receive an implant card, contact the hospital’s medical records department to track it down. Don’t let them off the hook by just giving you a name. You want that lot number.
Recalls and safety alerts are usually specific to the lot number of the device. They frequently cover devices that have crossed state lines but sometimes do not raise to the number of an actual market withdrawal.
Cross-Reference Your Device Against FDA Records
The FDA’s MAUDE database (Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience) can be searched by the public. It tracks adverse event reports from manufacturers, hospitals, and patients. Input the name of the device or the device manufacturer – it will return whether other patients have reported complications like your symptoms.
The FDA also tracks product recalls via a public database. Look up the manufacturer and model of your device. If you discover a Class I Recall – a category for products where there’s a reasonable possibility of serious adverse health consequences or death – that is a strong piece of evidence. Not only has the danger been documented, but you will have also proven you weren’t the only one unaware of it.
This is part of the over one million medical device reports the FDA receives of suspected device-associated deaths, serious injuries, and malfunctions each year. That number indicates how often these incidents get reported – and how often they aren’t connected back to the patient experiencing them.
Understand Who Is Actually Liable
This distinction is important and something patients often confuse. If a product was poorly designed or left the assembly line with a flaw, that’s a product liability problem. It’s the manufacturer’s responsibility to release a secure product to the market. If a product was correctly designed but wasn’t installed properly, that’s another scenario that indicates an error during surgery and medical malpractice, not product liability.
Both could cause damage. However, they are different legal claims, with different defendants and different proof rules. Proximate cause legally establishes that the defect is what caused the injury – not an illness, or a surgical complication.
If the answer is the device, you have a product liability case. If the evidence points to surgery, the product manufacturer is rarely involved in surgical outcomes, so they’re rarely named in a lawsuit.
Also, the statute of limitations clock can start from when the injury is found, not when the surgery was performed. Waiting to find out more isn’t a neutral decision. If it is the device, the case is straightforward. The challenge lies in gathering the facts while they are still available and before the device is destroyed.
Comments are closed.