Share This Page

J&J to pay $2.5B to settle hip replacement suits

| Tuesday, Nov. 19, 2013, 6:57 p.m.

WASHINGTON — Johnson & Johnson said late Tuesday that it will pay $2.5 billion to settle thousands of lawsuits brought by hip replacement patients who accuse the company of selling faulty implants that led to injuries and additional surgeries.

The agreement presented in U.S. District Court in Toledo, Ohio, is one of the largest for the medical device industry. It resolves an estimated 8,000 cases of patients who had to have the company's metal ball-and-socket hip implant removed or replaced. J&J pulled the implant from the market in 2010 because data showed it failed sooner than older implants.

The deal provides about $250,000 per patient and covers those who had their implants removed or replaced before Aug. 31 this year. The company expects to make most of the payments to patients in 2014.

J&J's DePuy unit said in a statement that the deal does not cover all lawsuits pending against the company.

“DePuy will continue to defend against remaining claims and believes its actions related to the ASR Hip System have been appropriate and responsible,” the company said.

The artificial hip, known as the Articular Surface Replacement, or ASR, was sold for eight years to about 35,000 people in the United States and more than 90,000 people worldwide. New Brunswick, N.J.-based J&J stopped making the product in 2009 and recalled it the next year.

However, internal J&J documents unsealed in the case suggest that company officials were aware of problems with the device at least as far back as 2008.

According to a deposition from a J&J official, a 2011 company review of a patient registry concluded that more than one-third of the implants were expected to fail within five years of their implantation. Orthopedic hips are generally supposed to last at least 10 years.

The company's lawyers have denied that J&J acted improperly.

For decades, nearly all orthopedic hips were coated with plastic or ceramic. But a decade ago, many surgeons began to favor all-metal implants based on laboratory tests suggesting the devices would be more resistant to wear and reduce the chances of dislocation.

But recent data from patient registries show the devices fail at a higher rate than older implants. Last year, a panel of government advisers said there are few, if any, cases where metal-on-metal hip implants should be recommended.

The pain and inflammation reported by patients implanted with the hips is usually caused by tiny metal particles that seep into the joint, damaging the surrounding tissue and bone.

DePuy said it had set aside funds to cover the settlement, which is not expected to affect earnings.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.