Table of contents
- Latest Cartiva Implant Lawsuit Updates
- June 22, 2026: Court Sets Organizational Meeting
- April 22, 2026: Panel Enters CTO-3
- February 5, 2026: Panel Creates MDL No. 3172
- December 4, 2024: FDA Posts Class 2 Recall
- October 31, 2024: Stryker Issues Recall Notice
- August 27, 2018: Wright Medical Announces Cartiva Deal
- What Is the Cartiva Synthetic Cartilage Implant?
- Who May Be Affected?
- Reported Injuries or Damages
- Recall and Regulatory Background
- Evidence to Preserve
- Filing Deadlines
- Frequently Asked Questions
- Can I Join a Cartiva Implant Lawsuit?
- What Questions Do the Cartiva Implant Cases Share?
- What Does the Research Say About the Cartiva Implant?
- Is the Cartiva Implant Legit?
Plaintiffs in a federal product liability lawsuit allege the Cartiva Synthetic Cartilage Implant failed, causing pain and lost mobility that required more surgery. The cases involve people who received the implant in the big-toe joint.
The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation centralized the cases as MDL No. 3172 in the Eastern District of Arkansas on February 5, 2026. Judge Kristine G. Baker oversees pretrial proceedings. No settlement or verdict has been reported.
The FDA also lists a Class 2 recall of the device, and its status is open. Stryker sent the recall notice to surgeons and hospitals on behalf of the defendant, Cartiva, Inc.
Latest Cartiva Implant Lawsuit Updates
June 22, 2026: Court Sets Organizational Meeting
June 22, 2026: Chief Judge Kristine G. Baker signed a letter order scheduling an initial organizational meeting in MDL No. 3172 for August 26, 2026, according to the Eastern District of Arkansas [1].
April 22, 2026: Panel Enters CTO-3
April 22, 2026: The JPML entered a conditional order, CTO-3 [2]. The order added Bhatt v. Cartiva, Inc., a case from the Eastern District of North Carolina.
CTO-3 notes that 9 additional actions had been transferred to the Eastern District of Arkansas since the first five on February 5, 2026. Judge Baker presides over the coordinated pretrial work.
February 5, 2026: Panel Creates MDL No. 3172
February 5, 2026: The panel centralized five Cartiva implant actions in Arkansas federal court, creating MDL No. 3172 under Judge Kristine G. Baker [3].
Plaintiffs are individuals who received a Cartiva Synthetic Cartilage Implant. They assert claims for strict products liability, negligence and breach of express and implied warranties. At that time, five actions and nine potential tag-along actions were pending in seven districts.
December 4, 2024: FDA Posts Class 2 Recall
December 4, 2024: The FDA posted Class 2 device recall Z-0598-2025 for the Cartiva Synthetic Cartilage Implant, made by Cartiva, Inc. [4]. The FDA-determined cause is device design.
The recall covers catalog numbers CAR-06-US, CAR-08-US, CAR-10-US and CAR-12-US, which are the 6, 8, 10 and 12 mm sizes.
October 31, 2024: Stryker Issues Recall Notice
October 31, 2024: Stryker, acting on behalf of Cartiva, Inc., issued an urgent medical device recall notice to surgeons and hospital risk managers [5]. It covers all lots distributed from July 2016 to October 2024.
Stryker acquired Wright Medical Group N.V. in 2020. Cartiva, Inc. was a wholly owned subsidiary of Wright Medical Group N.V.
August 27, 2018: Wright Medical Announces Cartiva Deal
August 27, 2018: Wright Medical Group N.V. announced a definitive agreement to acquire Cartiva, Inc. [6]. Wright would acquire 100% of Cartiva’s outstanding equity for $435 million in cash.
The same press release states that Cartiva’s implant had received U.S. Premarket Approval in July 2016, before the agreement.
What Is the Cartiva Synthetic Cartilage Implant?
The FDA-approved instructions for use describe the Cartiva Synthetic Cartilage Implant as an organic hydrogel polymer made of polyvinyl alcohol and saline [7].
It is meant to replace painful damaged cartilage in the first metatarsophalangeal joint, at the base of the big toe. The FDA approved it under PMA P150017.
Who May Be Affected?
People who had a Cartiva Synthetic Cartilage Implant placed in the first metatarsophalangeal joint, found in the big toe, may be affected. The implant treats painful degenerative or post-traumatic arthritis, called hallux limitus or hallux rigidus.
The implant came in 6, 8, 10 and 12 mm sizes. The recall notice lists new or worsening pain, difficulty walking, skin reactions, stiffness, swelling or weakness of the big toe joint.
Plaintiffs allege they received the implant and then needed surgery to remove it and fuse the arthritic joint. Whether a person qualifies depends on an individual legal review by a lawyer.
Reported Injuries or Damages
Plaintiffs in the MDL allege the Cartiva implant failed. These are allegations, and no court has made a liability finding.
The JPML order quotes complaints that allege implant migration with swelling and pain, bone loss and loss of mobility, and that plaintiffs will need additional fusion surgeries.
The Stryker recall notice is a company statement. It says patients may have a higher-than-expected rate of revision, removal, implant subsidence, displacement, pain, nerve damage or fragmentation of the implant.
Brandao and colleagues published a case series in the Journal of Orthopaedics in 2020 [8]. It followed 55 patients for an average of 21 months. The study predates the 2024 recall.
Recall and Regulatory Background
Stryker’s recall notice, sent on behalf of Cartiva, asks surgeons and hospitals to follow patients who have new or worsening big-toe symptoms. It also asks them to quarantine and return unused devices and to report adverse events.
Reports go to fieldaction@stryker.com or to the FDA. A recall does not by itself establish liability, and it does not decide who may file a claim.
Evidence to Preserve
Keep these records and items. They may help show which device was used and what followed:
- The implant card or surgery report that shows the Cartiva implant size and lot number of the implant.
- Reports from the first surgery and from any revision or fusion surgery, plus medical records and bills.
- X-rays, CT scans and MRI studies taken before and after the implant failed.
- Any removed implant, kept as it is and stored safely, not discarded.
- Photographs of the foot and toe, and a diary of pain, swelling and trouble walking.
- Work-loss and pay records, and any letters or recall notices from the surgeon or maker.
Filing Deadlines
Filing deadlines are set by state law. They vary with where a person lives and when the injury and the implant failure happened.
Some states start the clock when the problem was found, so the date of diagnosis can matter for a person’s deadline.
Even a claim with strong facts can end if the filing window closes. Anyone who may have a claim should speak with a lawyer promptly.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can I Join a Cartiva Implant Lawsuit?
A person can bring a Cartiva implant lawsuit by filing a case with a lawyer. The JPML sent the existing cases to Arkansas for coordinated pretrial proceedings, and the court entered its Order Upon Transfer on February 18, 2026.
What Questions Do the Cartiva Implant Cases Share?
The Cartiva implant cases share common questions, according to the JPML order. These cover causation, the sufficiency of Cartiva’s labelling, its representations to the FDA during approval, and the recall circumstances. Cartiva opposed centralization.
What Does the Research Say About the Cartiva Implant?
The research on the Cartiva implant includes a single-centre case series by Brandao and colleagues. Function scores improved, and the authors reported low early revision rates. They added that durability and survivability of the implant would continue to be studied.
Is the Cartiva Implant Legit?
The Cartiva implant is a real device that the FDA approved for use in the big-toe joint. According to its instructions for use, it is a molded cylindrical implant that surgeons press into the metatarsal head.