Who Qualifies for the Cartiva Toe Implant Lawsuit?

Not everyone who received a Cartiva implant will qualify for a lawsuit, but certain factors commonly appear in claims currently being investigated.

In general, eligibility depends on whether a patient received the device, suffered complications after implantation, and experienced damages related to those complications.

Many lawsuits involve allegations of Cartiva toe implant failure resulting in revision surgery, ongoing pain, loss of mobility, or other adverse outcomes.

Medical records, imaging studies, and treatment history are often used to determine whether a claim meets the basic requirements for litigation.

You may qualify for the Cartiva toe implant lawsuit if:

• You Received a Cartiva Synthetic Cartilage Implant: The first requirement is proof that you received a Cartiva Synthetic Cartilage Implant as part of a procedure involving the big toe joint. Surgical records, operative reports, and implant documentation can help confirm that the recalled device was implanted.
• You Experienced Complications After Implantation: Many qualifying claims involve patients who suffered complications after receiving the implant, including persistent pain, implant subsidence, loss of motion, nerve-related symptoms, or implant fracture. Symptoms may develop shortly after surgery or emerge months or years later as the device deteriorates or loses stability.
• Your Injuries Required Additional Medical Treatment: The strongest claims often involve patients who required additional medical care after the original implantation procedure. Examples include diagnostic imaging, physical therapy, pain management, revision surgery, implant removal, or fusion surgery performed to address complications associated with the failed device.

Individuals who satisfy these basic requirements may have grounds to pursue compensation through a Cartiva lawsuit.

The strength and value of a claim will often depend on the severity of the injuries, the treatment required, and the evidence connecting those injuries to the implant.

A case review with an attorney can help determine whether your circumstances meet the criteria for filing a claim.

Injuries That May Qualify for a Cartiva Lawsuit

Many Cartiva implant cases involve injuries that extend far beyond the symptoms patients originally sought to treat.

The Cartiva big toe implant was developed to replace damaged cartilage and preserve motion in the joint, but some patients report severe pain, loss of function, and the need for additional surgeries after implantation.

In many lawsuits, injured patients allege that complications worsened over time, making it difficult to walk, exercise, work, or participate in normal daily activities.

The severity of these injuries often plays a major role in determining whether a claim qualifies for litigation and the potential compensation that may be available.

Common injuries and complications reported in Cartiva lawsuits include:

• Persistent Pain and Loss of Mobility – Many patients report significant pain that continues long after recovery from the original procedure, along with stiffness and reduced movement in the big toe joint.
• Implant Subsidence, Displacement, or Loosening – Some claims involve allegations that the implant sinks into surrounding bone, loses stability, or experiences implant slipping that interferes with normal joint function.
• Nerve Damage and Sensory Changes – Patients have reported numbness, tingling, burning sensations, and other nerve-related symptoms following implant failure.
• Implant Removal and Revision Surgery – Certain complications require surgeons to remove the failed implant and perform corrective procedures to address ongoing symptoms and joint damage.
• Fusion Surgery After Cartiva Failure – Some patients ultimately require big toe fusion surgery after the implant fails, resulting in permanent loss of motion within the joint.

Not every patient will experience the same complications, and the severity of symptoms can vary significantly from case to case.

Medical records, imaging studies, operative reports, and physician findings can help establish the extent of the injuries and their connection to the device.

Individuals who suffered significant pain, required revision procedures, or experienced long-term mobility limitations may have grounds to pursue a Cartiva lawsuit.

Common Cartiva Implant Failure Symptoms

The Cartiva SCI was designed to treat arthritis in the big toe joint and relieve pain while preserving motion, but many patients report new or worsening symptoms after implantation.

Some symptoms appear gradually as the device deteriorates or loses stability, while others develop shortly after the original foot and ankle surgery.

Recognizing these warning signs may help patients seek medical evaluation before additional joint damage occurs.

Common Cartiva Implant Failure Symptoms Include:

• Persistent or worsening pain in the big toe joint
• Swelling around the implant site
• Difficulty walking or bearing weight
• Reduced range of motion
• Joint stiffness
• A feeling of instability in the toe
• Grinding, clicking, or popping sensations during movement
• Numbness or tingling in the toe or foot
• Redness or inflammation around the joint
• Pain during exercise or physical activity
• Difficulty wearing certain shoes
• Loss of balance or altered gait
• Recurring symptoms after an initially successful recovery
• Signs of implant loosening, displacement, or subsidence

Does the Cartiva Recall Affect Eligibility?

The 2024 Class II recall may be an important factor in a Cartiva lawsuit, but it does not automatically qualify someone to file a claim.

Eligibility generally depends on whether a patient suffered injuries or complications associated with the implant, rather than the recall alone.

Many Cartiva patients who experienced persistent pain, implant failure, revision surgery, or joint fusion surgery after receiving the device may have grounds to pursue legal action.

The recall was issued after post-market data revealed a Cartiva implant failure rate substantially higher than the rates reported during the FDA approval process, bringing increased attention to the risks associated with the device.

Individuals who experienced complications covered by the recall may wish to have their case reviewed to determine whether they qualify for a Cartiva lawsuit.

The strongest Cartiva implant claims usually involve clear medical evidence showing that the device failed and caused measurable harm.

Claims may be stronger when a patient required additional surgery, experienced long-term impairment, or has imaging that documents a failed Cartiva implant.

Lawsuits against medical device manufacturers often depend on connecting the product failure to the patient’s injuries through records, surgical findings, and treating physician notes.

While each case requires an individual review, certain fact patterns may carry greater evidentiary support than others.

Those most likely to have a strong Cartiva implant recall lawsuit include:

• Patients who underwent revision surgery: Revision surgery may show that the original implant did not perform as intended and that additional medical intervention was necessary to address the complication.
• Patients who had the Cartiva implant removed: Implant removal can support allegations that the device failed, loosened, caused pain, or could no longer remain safely in the joint.
• Patients who required fusion surgery: Fusion surgery after Cartiva failure may indicate permanent loss of motion in the big toe joint and a more serious long-term injury.
• Patients with documented implant failure on imaging: X-rays, MRIs, CT scans, or physician reports showing subsidence, displacement, loosening, or bone damage can provide important medical evidence for a claim.

A strong claim does not require every factor listed above, but objective documentation can make the facts clearer.

Medical records showing the device, the complication, and the treatment timeline may help establish both eligibility and potential damages.

An attorney can review the records to determine whether the facts support a Cartiva lawsuit.

Successful Cartiva lawsuits are often supported by medical records and other documentation that show the implant was used and that complications developed afterward.

Evidence can help establish the timeline of treatment, the nature of the injuries, and the connection between the device and the patient’s symptoms.

In many cases involving Cartiva implant problems, objective medical findings are among the most important pieces of evidence available.

Documentation of revision surgery, implant removal, or imaging-confirmed device failure may strengthen a claim by demonstrating the extent of the complications.

The more complete the supporting records, the easier it may be to evaluate eligibility and potential damages.

Evidence that may help support a Cartiva lawsuit includes:

• Surgical records showing implantation of the Cartiva device
• Operative reports from revision surgery or implant removal procedures
• X-rays, MRIs, CT scans, or other imaging studies
• Medical records documenting pain, mobility limitations, and other symptoms
• Physician notes diagnosing implant failure, subsidence, or displacement
• Physical therapy and rehabilitation records
• Records of prescription medications and pain management treatment
• Medical bills and proof of out-of-pocket expenses
• Employment records showing lost wages or missed work
• Disability or impairment evaluations
• Photographs documenting swelling or visible complications
• Documentation related to the recalled implant, when available

These records can help demonstrate both the existence of the injury and the impact it has had on the patient’s life.

Cartiva implant lawyers can review the available evidence and identify additional records that may be useful in supporting a Cartiva claim.

Not every person who received a Cartiva implant will have a viable legal claim.

In general, eligibility becomes more difficult to establish when a patient experienced no complications, required no additional treatment, or has no medical evidence connecting their symptoms to the device.

While Cartiva lawsuits allege that the implant caused a range of serious complications, a lawsuit typically requires proof of injury and resulting damages.

Individuals who had successful outcomes with the implant and did not experience device-related complications may not qualify to pursue a Cartiva lawsuit.

Patients who received the Cartiva synthetic cartilage device and later experienced implant failure, revision surgery, implant removal, fusion surgery, or other complications may have the right to pursue compensation through a lawsuit.

Many claims seek recovery for medical expenses, lost income, pain and suffering, and other damages associated with the alleged failure of the device.

As litigation continues nationwide, individuals are coming forward with allegations that the implant did not perform as represented and caused significant physical and financial harm.

Our lawyers are seeking Cartiva implant cases involving persistent pain, loss of mobility, implant subsidence, displacement, nerve damage, revision procedures, and other complications associated with the device.

If you believe you may qualify for a Cartiva lawsuit, contact TorHoerman Law today for a free, no-obligation case review.

A member of our team can evaluate your medical records, discuss your potential claim, and help determine whether you may be eligible to pursue compensation.