Zimmer Recalls Reverse Shoulder Device Due to Injury
- Last Updated: August 13th, 2023
Attorney Jessica Paluch-Hoerman, founder of TruLaw, has over 28 years of experience as a personal injury and mass tort attorney, and previously worked as an international tax attorney at Deloitte. Jessie collaborates with attorneys nationwide — enabling her to share reliable, up-to-date legal information with our readers.
Legally Reviewed
This article has been written and reviewed for legal accuracy and clarity by the team of writers and legal experts at TruLaw and is as accurate as possible. This content should not be taken as legal advice from an attorney. If you would like to learn more about our owner and experienced injury lawyer, Jessie Paluch, you can do so here.
Fact-Checked
TruLaw does everything possible to make sure the information in this article is up to date and accurate. If you need specific legal advice about your case, contact us by using the chat on the bottom of this page. This article should not be taken as advice from an attorney.
Zimmer Recalls Reverse Shoulder Device Due to Injury
On December 20, 2016, Zimmer Biomet sent an Urgent Medical Device Recall Notice to health care providers who used the Comprehensive Reverse Shoulder Device.
Patients who received total shoulder replacements using the device were also notified.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has identified the notice as a Class I recall.
This is the most serious type of recall issued by the agency.
The use of the affected devices may cause serious injuries or death.
Table of Contents
What is a Reverse Shoulder Device?
A conventional shoulder replacement device mimics the normal anatomy of the shoulder.
A plastic cup is fitted into the shoulder socket and a metal ball is attached to the top of the upper arm bone.
A reverse should device, otherwise called a reverse total shoulder replacement (RTSA), the socket and metal ball are switched.
The metal ball is fixed to the socket and the plastic cup is fixed to the upper end of the humerus.
A reverse total shoulder replacement is more effective for patients with cuff tear arthropathy because it relies on different muscles to move the arm.
In a patient with a large rotator cuff tear and cuff tear arthropathy, a reverse total shoulder replacement relies on the deltoid muscle, instead of the rotator cuff, to power and position the arm.
Complications Associated with RTSA
Complication rates after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty are three to five times that of conventional total shoulder replacement arthroplasty.
This is according to a study published in the journal Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine.
The complications described in the study included:
- Neurological injury
- Infection
- Dislocation
- Instability
- Acromial or scapular spine fracture
- Hematoma
- Scapular notching
Despite the benefits of the RTSA, patients who undergo this procedure are often subject to complications similar to conventional total shoulder arthroplasty as well as unique to RTSA because of the major anatomical, physiological, and bio-mechanical changes made to the shoulder joint.
Patients wondering if the Reverse Shoulder Device recall applies to them, may find this article helpful.
Managing Attorney & Owner
With over 25 years of legal experience, Jessica Paluch-Hoerman is an Illinois lawyer, a CPA, and a mother of three. She spent the first decade of her career working as an international tax attorney at Deloitte.
In 2009, Jessie co-founded her own law firm with her husband – which has scaled to over 30 employees since its conception.
In 2016, Jessie founded TruLaw, which allows her to collaborate with attorneys and legal experts across the United States on a daily basis. This hypervaluable network of experts is what enables her to share the most reliable, accurate, and up-to-date legal information with our readers!
Here, at TruLaw, we’re committed to helping victims get the justice they deserve.
Alongside our partner law firms, we have successfully collected over $3 Billion in verdicts and settlements on behalf of injured individuals.
Would you like our help?
At TruLaw, we fiercely combat corporations that endanger individuals’ well-being. If you’ve suffered injuries and believe these well-funded entities should be held accountable, we’re here for you.
With TruLaw, you gain access to successful and seasoned lawyers who maximize your chances of success. Our lawyers invest in you—they do not receive a dime until your lawsuit reaches a successful resolution!
AFFF Lawsuit claims are being filed against manufacturers of aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF), commonly used in firefighting.
Claims allege that companies such as 3M, DuPont, and Tyco Fire Products failed to adequately warn users about the potential dangers of AFFF exposure — including increased risks of various cancers and diseases.
Depo Provera Lawsuit claims are being filed by individuals who allege they developed meningioma (a type of brain tumor) after receiving Depo-Provera birth control injections.
A 2024 study found that women using Depo-Provera for at least 1 year are five times more likely to develop meningioma brain tumors compared to those not using the drug.
Suboxone Tooth Decay Lawsuit claims are being filed against Indivior, the manufacturer of Suboxone, a medication used to treat opioid addiction.
Claims allege that Indivior failed to adequately warn users about the potential dangers of severe tooth decay and dental injuries associated with Suboxone’s sublingual film version.
Social Media Harm Lawsuits are being filed against social media companies for allegedly causing mental health issues in children and teens.
Claims allege that companies like Meta, Google, ByteDance, and Snap designed addictive platforms that led to anxiety, depression, and other mental health issues without adequately warning users or parents.
Transvaginal Mesh Lawsuits are being filed against manufacturers of transvaginal mesh products used to treat pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and stress urinary incontinence (SUI).
Claims allege that companies like Ethicon, C.R. Bard, and Boston Scientific failed to adequately warn about potential dangers — including erosion, pain, and infection.
Bair Hugger Warming Blanket Lawsuits involve claims against 3M — alleging their surgical warming blankets caused severe infections and complications (particularly in hip and knee replacement surgeries).
Plaintiffs claim 3M failed to warn about potential risks — despite knowing about increased risk of deep joint infections since 2011.
Baby Formula NEC Lawsuit claims are being filed against manufacturers of cow’s milk-based baby formula products.
Claims allege that companies like Abbott Laboratories (Similac) and Mead Johnson & Company (Enfamil) failed to warn about the increased risk of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC) in premature infants.
Here, at TruLaw, we’re committed to helping victims get the justice they deserve.
Alongside our partner law firms, we have successfully collected over $3 Billion in verdicts and settlements on behalf of injured individuals.
Would you like our help?
