Cartiva Failure Lawsuit

About the Cartiva Failure Lawsuit

Osteoarthritis of the big toe can cause debilitating problems like hallux rigidus and hallux limitus. Traditional treatment options for these painful conditions are often limited and often invasive. The Cartiva toe implant was marketed as a groundbreaking alternative to joint fusion surgery, offering hope to patients searching for a better solution.

Unfortunately, Cartiva’s design defects have allegedly been linked to soaring failure rates and a slew of health problems. The device manufacturer, Stryker, is now being sued by patients who received the implant and suffered complications.

If you or a loved one were impacted by Cartiva toe implant failure, you may qualify to file a lawsuit. Learn about eligibility requirements and receive a no-cost consultation with an experienced attorney by completing the form at the top of the page.

Cartiva Toe Implant: Revolutionary Treatment or Risky “Experiment”? 

Big toe arthritis is a potentially life-altering problem that impacts more than 2 million Americans. The condition can result from a breakdown of cartilage covering the bones of the metatarsophalangeal joint. It can limit an individual’s mobility, making jumping, running, and walking extremely painful.

For much of modern medical history, arthrodesis—or joint fusion surgery—was the gold-standard treatment for degenerative arthritis of the big toe. Arthrodesis is effective at relieving pain but further limits mobility, making it an undesirable treatment option for active patients.

In the 2000s, medical device producer Stryker introduced the Cartiva implant, a synthetic cartilage device made of a polyvinyl alcohol-based (PVA) hydrogel. The Cartiva device was intended to be implanted into the big toe to “replace” lost or degraded cartilage. Following a set of clinical trials, Stryker requested and received FDA approval for the toe implant in 2016. 

Stryker claimed that, along with a mere 13.5% failure rate, the device provided a 128% improvement in mobility and a 91% reduction in pain two years post-operation. A reduced rate of complications was also reported when compared to traditional fusion surgery. Stryker began marketing Cartiva as an “excellent alternative” to joint fusion, emphasizing the device’s ability to reduce pain while preserving anatomical function and range of motion. 

Thousands of patients worldwide began opting for the Cartiva toe implant. None may have had reason to believe that Stryker’s claims were too good to be true—but, sadly, lawsuits say this may have been the case. As time went on, some patients began reporting allegedly serious side effects associated with their Cartiva implants, including pain, swelling, migration, fractures, nerve damage, and more.

These adverse outcomes led to further post-market research, which in 2023 revealed an allegedly much greater volume of complications and a failure rate upwards of 64%. In light of the new data, insurance companies began denying coverage for the Cartiva synthetic cartilage implant, deeming it “experimental.” It even prompted a warning from a doctor involved in its development to “NOT GET A CARTIVA IMPLANT until further notice.”

Though many believe it took the company a concerning amount of time to act, Stryker eventually issued a Cartiva recall in 2024. This action was too little, too late, say plaintiffs, who continue to seek justice.