Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Medical Implants in the New Biomedical Frontier

By Neal A. DeYoung
April 27, 2006

More than a million tissue transplants and medical device implants were performed in 2005, according to available estimates. It is reported that the organ and tissue transplantation market in the U.S. was valued at more than $11 billion in 2005. Today, the multi-billion-dollar biomedical industry continues to expand well beyond its more humble origins of blood, organ and tissue banking. These developing biotechnologies have forced courts to address novel issues and concerns regarding a new generation of biosurgical implants outside the parameters of settled judicial and statutory frameworks dealing with medical implants. The widespread usage of such new implants has also called into question the settled case law that hospitals and physicians may not be held strictly liable for the implantation of defective medical device products. See, eg ADDENDUM * TORT LAW: IV: Passing the Essence Test: Health Care Providers Escape Strict Liability for Medical Devices), 50 S.C. L. Rev. 463 (1999). New types of implants, such as cryopreserved heart valves, may be manufactured from human tissue, but they bear little resemblance to the tissue banking practices sought to be protected under the state blood shield statutes enacted over a quarter of century ago.

Product Liability Claims

Despite the dramatic changes in this industry, product liability claims against the manufacturers of tissue-based medical implants continue to face legal hurdles based on the state blood shield statutes. These statutes typically preclude such claims against the providers of blood and tissue. Recently, in Miller v. Hartford Hospital, 2005 Conn. Super. LEXIS 3604 (Dec. 22, 2005), a Connecticut Superior Court denied a motion by Cryolife Inc., a biotechnology company, to dismiss such a product liability claim brought on behalf of the estate of a patient implanted with one of Cryolife's human heart valve products. The complaint alleged that the valve was contaminated with aspergillus, resulting in the patient's death.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

Legal Possession: What Does It Mean? Image

Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.

Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York Image

In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?