Who manufactures the Profemur (MicroPort Orthopedics, Inc.) Hip implant in the US and what are the associated problems, including FDA (Food and Drug Administration) recall status and potential MDL (Multidistrict Litigation) lawsuits?

Medical Advisory BoardAll articles are reviewed for accuracy by our Medical Advisory Board
Educational purpose only • Exercise caution as content is pending human review
Article Review Status
Submitted
Under Review
Approved

Last updated: September 9, 2025View editorial policy

Personalize

Help us tailor your experience

Which best describes you? Your choice helps us use language that's most understandable for you.

Profemur Hip Implant: Manufacturer, Problems, FDA Recalls, and MDL Lawsuits

Manufacturer and Device Information

The Profemur Hip implant is manufactured by MicroPort Orthopedics, Inc. (formerly Wright Medical) in the US and has been associated with significant complications including modular neck fractures, loosening, and metallosis, with certain models having higher failure rates requiring revision surgeries.

The Profemur system includes several variants, with the most commonly discussed being the Profemur Z and Profemur E models. These are bimodular femoral stems designed with modularity at both the head-neck and neck-body junctions 1.

Major Problems and Complications

Design Issues and Failure Rates

  • Modular Neck Fractures: The bimodular design has been associated with neck fractures, particularly in:

    • Young male patients (OR 3.98) 2
    • Patients with long neck components (OR 6.77) 2
    • Patients with cobalt-chromium alloy necks (OR 5.7) 2
    • Larger femoral head sizes (OR 3.2) 1
    • Higher BMI (OR 1.19) 1
    • Greater offset (OR 1.83) 1
  • Aseptic Loosening: The Profemur E model showed particularly high rates of loosening (9%) 1

  • Other Complications:

    • Metallosis (1%) 1
    • Periprosthetic fractures (1%) 1
    • Adverse local tissue reactions to metal debris 1

Survivorship Concerns

  • Studies have reported 85% survivorship for both Profemur E and Z stems at mean follow-up of 50 months 1
  • A Slovenian multicenter study found a 97% 12-year survival rate free from aseptic loosening, but still identified concerning rates of neck fractures (0.83%) 2

FDA Recall Information

The evidence provided does not specifically mention an FDA recall of the Profemur hip implant. However, the literature indicates significant concerns with the device:

  • Multiple studies report high failure rates of the bimodular neck design 1, 2
  • One study explicitly states: "Based on our experience we cannot recommend the use of bimodular femoral neck implants" 1

MDL Lawsuits

The evidence provided does not specifically mention Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) lawsuits related to the Profemur hip implant. However, the documented high failure rates, complications, and specific design issues would typically be grounds for legal action.

Clinical Implications and Management

For Patients with Existing Implants

  • Regular radiographic follow-up is recommended for patients with MoM (metal-on-metal) hip implants every 1-2 years 3
  • Radiographs should assess component position, loosening, bone quality, osteolysis, fracture, dislocation, femoral neck narrowing, and medial femoral calcar erosion 3
  • Ultrasound and MARS-MRI may be beneficial for detecting pseudotumors and other adverse reactions to metal debris in asymptomatic patients 3

For Surgeons and Healthcare Providers

  • The presence of hip prostheses makes the site unsuitable for diagnostic bone mineral density assessment; the contralateral side should be used instead 3
  • Patients with bimodular Profemur implants, especially young males with long necks and larger head sizes, should be monitored more closely for potential complications 1, 2

Pitfalls to Avoid

  • Ignoring subtle radiographic changes: Serial radiographs are essential to detect early signs of failure 3
  • Overlooking asymptomatic patients: Complications can develop even in patients without symptoms 3
  • Failure to recognize risk factors: Patients with specific risk factors (male sex, higher BMI, long neck components) should be monitored more closely 2
  • Inadequate imaging: Standard radiographs may miss soft tissue complications; advanced imaging with ultrasound or MARS-MRI may be necessary 3

The evidence strongly suggests that the risks of using bimodular femoral neck implants like certain Profemur models outweigh the benefits for most patients, with several studies documenting complications that would not have occurred with different stem designs 1, 2.

References

Research

High Risk of Failure With Bimodular Femoral Components in THA.

Clinical orthopaedics and related research, 2016

Guideline

Guideline Directed Topic Overview

Dr.Oracle Medical Advisory Board & Editors, 2025

Professional Medical Disclaimer

This information is intended for healthcare professionals. Any medical decision-making should rely on clinical judgment and independently verified information. The content provided herein does not replace professional discretion and should be considered supplementary to established clinical guidelines. Healthcare providers should verify all information against primary literature and current practice standards before application in patient care. Dr.Oracle assumes no liability for clinical decisions based on this content.

Have a follow-up question?

Our Medical A.I. is used by practicing medical doctors at top research institutions around the world. Ask any follow up question and get world-class guideline-backed answers instantly.