Cartiva Implant

The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation consolidated all federal Cartiva Synthetic Cartilage Implant litigation into MDL No. 3172 on February 5, 2026, assigning the docket to Judge Kristine G. Baker in the Eastern District of Arkansas. Plaintiffs allege Stryker's polyvinyl alcohol hydrogel toe implant carries failure rates reaching 50-64% in real-world use—far exceeding the 13.5% rate from the 2016 FDA approval trial—causing subsidence, bone erosion, and frequently necessitating revision fusion surgery. Stryker issued a voluntary Class II recall on October 31, 2024, after the FDA adverse event database accumulated more than 400 reports.

MDL 3172 (In re: Cartiva Synthetic Cartilage Implant Products Liability Litigation) sits in the Eastern District of Arkansas before Chief Judge Kristine G. Baker, who scheduled an initial organizational hearing for August 26, 2026 at 1:30 p.m. per docket entry. The MDL was centralized February 5, 2026; CTO-6 issued June 24, 2026 transferred additional actions. Court-ordered mediation before former Magistrate Judge Lisa Lenihan began March 12, 2026; no global settlement framework announced.

Approximately 13,000-15,000 U.S. patients received Cartiva SCI implants from July 2016 through October 31, 2024 recall; 2.2 million Americans suffer hallux limitus/rigidus (target indication). FDA adverse event database contains 400+ reports, majority involving implant loosening or failure. Real-world failure rates 50-64% per independent studies versus 13.5% in original UK/Canada clinical trial (202 patients).

• West Virginia

  Southern District of West Virginia: Judge Irene Berger scheduled first bellwether trial for August 3, 2026 with mandatory mediation to conclude by June 22, 2026; two filed cases at time of MDL petition. State court cases (Hughes and May) delayed to August 2026 by joint motion.

• Pennsylvania

  Didonato v. Cartiva Inc. filed February 2025 (dual-implant recipient, 2018-2019); additional September 2025 filing citing 64% failure rate at four weeks per November 2020 study.

• North Carolina

  Eastern District of North Carolina: Kiel v. Cartiva Inc. filed September 2025 alleging implant migration, removal, and subsequent big toe fusion; design defect and failure to warn claims on shrinkage-induced failure mechanism.

• Maryland

  District of Maryland: Hyatt v. Cartiva Inc. et al. filed February 2026; plaintiff alleges permanent big toe injuries, device loosening and degradation. One of three cases that had advanced beyond complaint filing at time of MDL petition.

• Illinois

  Northern District of Illinois: Kwasny v. Cartiva Inc. filed March 2025; Indiana plaintiff, implant failed to relieve hallux rigidus pain, left patient in worse condition.

• Texas

  Northern District of Texas: Coleman v. Cartiva Inc. filed April 2024; early-filed case alleging device failure requiring revision surgery.

• Arkansas

  Eastern District of Arkansas: MDL No. 3172 centralized February 5, 2026 before Judge Kristine G. Baker; venue selected due to Cartiva Inc. business operations through Arkansas suppliers and convenience-of-parties analysis per JPML transfer order.

• Kentucky

  Identified as state with high plaintiff concentration per litigation activity reports; statute of limitations and tort reform considerations affect filing strategy.