Analysis of Trends in FDA-Recalled Hip Arthroplasty Devices

Background: Hip arthroplasty implants are classified as Class III medical devices by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), requiring rigorous evaluation to ensure safety and efficacy. While these standards aim to ensure safety, device recalls remain an essential component of postmarket surveillance to address unforeseen performance issues. The objective of this study was to characterize the frequency, causes, and regulatory origins of FDA-recalled hip arthroplasty implants, identifying trends in device failure and implications for patient safety. Methods: A retrospective review of the FDA's medical device recall database was conducted, focusing on implantable hip arthroplasty devices and assistive technology from 2002 to 2024. Data were categorized by device type, recall class, reason for recall, and regulatory approval pathway. Trends over time were analyzed using negative binomial regression. Results: Of 1,863 hip-related recall records screened, 771 implantable devices met inclusion criteria. Design flaws accounted for the most recalls (35.8%), followed by packaging (24.9%) and labelling errors (11.7%). Most recalls were Class II (94.3%) and approved through the 510(k) pathway (94.7%). The number of recalls peaked in 2014 and has declined in recent years (p < 0.001). Robotic-assisted and navigation-related systems accounted for 1.8% of recalls and were frequently associated with software-related design problems (57.1%). Conclusion: Most recalled hip implants were approved through the 510(k) pathway. However, this likely reflects the high volume of devices approved through this mechanism rather than inherent pathway risk. Design-related failures were most prevalent, often involving modular junctions or material degradation. Although robotic and navigation systems currently account for a small minority of recalls, they introduce novel, distinct software-related failure modes that warrant continued postmarket surveillance as these technologies evolve. Level of Evidence: Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
JBJS Open Access
Published
2026-04-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.2106/jbjs.oa.26.00062
Primary Topic
Orthopaedic implants and arthroplasty
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Analysis of Trends in FDA-Recalled Hip Arthroplasty Devices

Jonathan Raspanti, Lazaros Poultsides, George C. Babis, Kalter Hali et al.
JBJS Open Access
Orthopaedic implants and arthroplasty
article

Analysis of Trends in FDA-Recalled Hip Arthroplasty Devices

Jonathan Raspanti, Lazaros Poultsides, George C. Babis, Kalter Hali, Sam Keshen, Johnathan R. Lex, Bheeshma Ravi, Lucas P A Lorimer, Nikolaos A Stavropoulos
article en

Abstract

Background: Hip arthroplasty implants are classified as Class III medical devices by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), requiring rigorous evaluation to ensure safety and efficacy. While these standards aim to ensure safety, device recalls remain an essential component of postmarket surveillance to address unforeseen performance issues. The objective of this study was to characterize the frequency, causes, and regulatory origins of FDA-recalled hip arthroplasty implants, identifying trends in device failure and implications for patient safety. Methods: A retrospective review of the FDA's medical device recall database was conducted, focusing on implantable hip arthroplasty devices and assistive technology from 2002 to 2024. Data were categorized by device type, recall class, reason for recall, and regulatory approval pathway. Trends over time were analyzed using negative binomial regression. Results: Of 1,863 hip-related recall records screened, 771 implantable devices met inclusion criteria. Design flaws accounted for the most recalls (35.8%), followed by packaging (24.9%) and labelling errors (11.7%). Most recalls were Class II (94.3%) and approved through the 510(k) pathway (94.7%). The number of recalls peaked in 2014 and has declined in recent years (p < 0.001). Robotic-assisted and navigation-related systems accounted for 1.8% of recalls and were frequently associated with software-related design problems (57.1%). Conclusion: Most recalled hip implants were approved through the 510(k) pathway. However, this likely reflects the high volume of devices approved through this mechanism rather than inherent pathway risk. Design-related failures were most prevalent, often involving modular junctions or material degradation. Although robotic and navigation systems currently account for a small minority of recalls, they introduce novel, distinct software-related failure modes that warrant continued postmarket surveillance as these technologies evolve. Level of Evidence: Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

JBJS Open AccessVol. 11(2)
Sunnybrook Health Science Centre (CA), Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland (IE), University of Ottawa (CA), University of Toronto (CA), National and Kapodistrian University of Athens (GR), Papageorgiou General Hospital (GR), Agia Olga Hospital (GR)
Openalex Percentile: Top 32%
Orthopaedic implants and arthroplasty
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.