Trident 690-00-22DRecalls & reported problems

Summary

The FDA's MAUDE database contains 22 adverse event reports that list this exact device (DI 07613327025538), received between Feb 27, 2017 and Sep 23, 2026 — classified as 21 injuries, 1 malfunction.

The most frequently reported specific device problem is “Device Dislodged or Dislocated” (12 reports).

1 FDA recall record name this device's identifier, 1 still open.

Reports come from manufacturers, hospitals and patients and are not verified by the FDA. A report does not prove the device caused the event, and counts can't be used to compare devices or estimate failure rates. What reports can and can't tell you · How this data works · Data updated Oct 16, 2026.

Recalls naming this device

1. Jul 30, 2026Open, Classified

   Affected devices were manufactured with Ultra High Molecular Weight Polyethylene (UHMWPE) raw material aged in excess of five years. Product has the potential for elevated levels of oxidation, which may result in increased wear, leading to hazards such as excessive wear debris, material fragments, fractured device, or disassociated device. Potential harms include revision surgery, pain, and inflammation.

   Z-3201-2026 · Root cause: Process change control · Recall details · FDA record ↗

Most reported problems

Recent adverse event reports

The 22 most recent of 22 reports, in the reporter's own words as published by the FDA.

• InjurySep 23, 2026Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem

  Patient problems: Insufficient Information

  MAUDE report 50873857 ↗
• InjuryJul 31, 2025Detachment of Device or Device Component; Detachment of Device or Device Component

  NO NEW INFORMATION.

  Patient problems: Ambulation or Postural Difficulties; Insufficient Information

  MAUDE report 22673843 ↗
• InjuryMay 21, 2024Fracture; Fracture

  ORIGINAL IMPLANTATION CIRCA 2021. PATIENT ATTENDED ROUTINE FOLLOW UP AND X-RAY REVEALED CONSTRAINED LINER DEFECT. PATIENT WAS THEN SCHEDULED FOR REVISION SURGERY, WHERE CONSTRAINED LINER WAS REMOVED AND STRYKER MDM IMPLANTED INTO THE EXISTING CUP.

  Patient problems: Ambulation or Postural Difficulties; Insufficient Information; Pain

  MAUDE report 19357960 ↗
• InjuryDec 13, 2023Degraded; Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem; Degraded; Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem

  IT WAS REPORTED THROUGH THE SUBMISSION OF A REVISION USAGE SHEET THAT THE PATIENT'S LEFT HIP WAS REVISED. COMPARING TO USAGE FROM PRIOR REVISION, A 22D CONSTRAINED LINER WAS REVISED TO A 22E CONSTRAINED LINER.

  Patient problems: Insufficient Information; Joint Laxity

  MAUDE report 18316664 ↗
• InjuryJun 24, 2022Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem; Adverse Event Without Identified Device or Use Problem

  AS REPORTED: "RIGHT HIP REV DUE TO INFECTION. CONSTRAINED LINER AND HEAD WERE REMOVED. NO MORE INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE PER DOCTOR."

  Patient problems: Unspecified Infection

  MAUDE report 14797110 ↗
• InjuryDec 1, 2021Detachment of Device or Device Component; Device Dislodged or Dislocated; Detachment of Device or Device Component; Device Dislodged or Dislocated

  AFTER THE SURGERY TRIDENT CONSTRAINED ACETABULAR LINER GOT FAILED. THE PATIENT HAS NOT OPERATED AGAIN YET, AFTER THE OPERATION, IT WILL BE HANDOVER TO THE DEALER.

  Patient problems: Ambulation or Postural Difficulties; Insufficient Information

  MAUDE report 12907209 ↗
• InjuryNov 3, 2021Detachment of Device or Device Component; Detachment of Device or Device Component

  AS REPORTED: "THE REVISION WAS DONE DUE TO DISLOCATION. NO FURTHER INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE FROM THE HOSPITAL." SPOKE TO REP: LEFT HIP, REVISION DUE TO DISSOCIATION OF THE LINER FROM THE SHELL. PATIENT WAS REVISED FROM A TRIDENT CONSTRAINED LINER, SIZE D WITH LFIT V40 22 + 3 MM HEAD TO AN MDM LINER AND INSERT WITH LFIT V40 22 + 8MM V40 HEAD. REP CONFIRMED THAT NO FURTHER INFORMATION WILL BE RELEASED BY THE HOSPITAL OR SURGEON.

  Patient problems: Insufficient Information

  MAUDE report 12744923 ↗
• InjuryMar 15, 2021Device Dislodged or Dislocated; Device Dislodged or Dislocated

  IT WAS REPORTED THAT THE PATIENT'S LEFT HIP WAS REVISED DUE TO DISLOCATION OF THE FEMORAL HEAD FROM THE CONSTRAINED ACETABULAR INSERT. AS THE PATIENT HAS HAD REPEATED REVISIONS FOR DISLOCATION, THE SURGEON DECIDED TO REVISE THE HEAD, LINER, SHELL, AND SCREWS IN ORDER TO RE-POSITION THE NEW SHELL.

  Patient problems: Joint Dislocation

  MAUDE report 11483522 ↗
• InjuryOct 27, 2020Device Dislodged or Dislocated; Device Dislodged or Dislocated

  IT WAS REPORTED THAT THE PATIENT'S LEFT HIP WAS REVISED DUE TO THE INNER BIPOLAR COMPONENT OF A CONSTRAINED LINER DISSOCIATING FROM THE OUTER BEARING. SURGEON REPORTED PATIENT SUFFERED A FALL, LANDING ON HER KNEE, AND REPORTED DEMENTIA AS A CONTRIBUTING FACTOR. REP CONFIRMED THERE ARE NO ALLEGATIONS AGAINST THE REVISED FEMORAL HEAD, PROVIDED USAGE SHEETS FROM CURRENT AND PREVIOUS PROCEDURES, AND CONFIRMED THAT NO FURTHER INFORMATION WILL BE RELEASED BY THE HOSPITAL OR SURGEON.

  Patient problems: Fall

  MAUDE report 10741413 ↗
• InjuryOct 23, 2020Detachment of Device or Device Component; Device Dislodged or Dislocated; Detachment of Device or Device Component; Device Dislodged or Dislocated

  A REVISION LEFT TOTAL HIP ARTHROPLASTY WAS PERFORMED TO REPLACE A CONSTRAINED LINER THAT HAD BECOME DISENGAGED FROM A ACETABULAR CUP. A NEW LFIT FEMORAL HEAD AND TRIDENT CONSTRAINED LINER WERE UTILIZED.

  Patient problems: Ambulation or Postural Difficulties

  MAUDE report 10725081 ↗
• InjuryMay 19, 2020Device Dislodged or Dislocated; Device Dislodged or Dislocated

  IT WAS REPORTED THAT THE PATIENT'S RIGHT HIP WAS REVISED DUE TO THE POLY LINER DISSOCIATING FROM THE ACETABULAR SHELL. THE LINER AND FEMORAL HEAD WERE REVISED. REP CONFIRMED THAT THERE ARE NO ALLEGATIONS AGAINST THE REVISED FEMORAL HEAD, AND THAT NO FURTHER INFORMATION WILL BE RELEASED BY THE HOSPITAL OR SURGEON.

  Patient problems: Injury

  MAUDE report 10072447 ↗
• InjuryApr 20, 2020Device Dislodged or Dislocated; Device Dislodged or Dislocated

  THIS PI IS FOR PATIENT 2 OF 2. WHILE REPORTING A REVISION OF ANOTHER PATIENT'S HIP DUE TO DISLOCATION OF A CONSTRAINED LINER FROM A TRIDENT II SHELL, THE SURGEON REPORTED THAT HE FOLLOWED UP WITH THREE ADDITIONAL PATIENTS THAT HAD TRIDENT II SHELLS WITH CONSTRAINED LINERS. TWO OF THE THREE PATIENTS HAVE RESPONDED THAT THEY HAVE HIP PAIN. THOUGH NOT REVISED AND NOT CONFIRMED AS OF THE TIME OF REPORT, THE SURGEON SUSPECTS THOSE PATIENTS MAY ALSO HAVE DISASSOCIATED CONSTRAINED LINERS. THE THIRD ADDITIONAL PATIENT HAS NOT RESPONDED AS OF THE TIME OF REPORT. NONE OF THE LOT CODES FOR EITHER THE INSERTS OR THE SHELLS ARE THE SAME ACROSS THE THREE PATIENTS (THE ONE REVISED, AND THE TWO REPORTING PAIN).

  Patient problems: Injury; Pain

  MAUDE report 9979411 ↗
• InjuryApr 20, 2020Device Dislodged or Dislocated; Device Dislodged or Dislocated

  IT WAS REPORTED THAT THE PATIENT'S RIGHT HIP WAS REVISED DUE TO DISASSOCIATION OF THE CONSTRAINED LINER COMPLETELY FROM THE ACETABULAR SHELL. THE CONSTRAINED LINER AND COMPETITOR HEAD WERE REVISED TO AN MDM LINER/ ADM INSERT CONSTRUCT WITH ANOTHER COMPETITOR HEAD.

  Patient problems: Injury

  MAUDE report 9979174 ↗
• InjuryOct 22, 2019Device Dislodged or Dislocated; Device Dislodged or Dislocated

  AS REPORTED: "PATIENT'S RIGHT CONSTRAINED LINER'S INNER HEAD DISASSOCIATED FROM THE OUTER HEAD". A SIZE D CONSTRAINED LINER, 22.2+0 LFIT METAL HEAD, AND COMPETITOR SHELL WERE REVISED TO A TRIDENT II REVISION SHELL WITH AN ADM/ MDM LINER CONSTRUCT. REP PROVIDED A USAGE SHEET FROM THE PRIMARY STRYKER IMPLANT AND CONFIRMED THAT NO FURTHER INFORMATION WILL BE RELEASED BY THE HOSPITAL OR SURGEON.

  Patient problems: Injury

  MAUDE report 9221088 ↗
• InjuryAug 29, 2019Device Dislodged or Dislocated; Device Dislodged or Dislocated

  IT WAS REPORTED THAT THE PATIENT'S RIGHT HIP WAS REVISED DUE TO DISASSOCIATION OF THE CONSTRAINED LINER FROM THE ACETABULAR SHELL. SURGEON ELECTED TO REVISE THE SHELL TO CHANGE ITS POSITION, THE CONSTRAINED LINER, AND THE FEMORAL HEAD TO A NEW SHELL WITH AN ECCENTRIC LINER AND HEW HEAD. REP CONFIRMED THERE ARE NO ALLEGATIONS AGAINST THE REVISED FEMORAL HEAD. SURGEON REPORTED THAT A SPINAL FUSION IN THE PATIENT'S HISTORY WAS A CONTRIBUTING FACTOR. REP PROVIDED A PRE-REVISION X-RAY AND USAGE SHEETS FOR ALL PATIENT HIP PROCEDURES.

  Patient problems: Injury

  MAUDE report 8944174 ↗
• InjuryJul 2, 2019Osseointegration Problem; Osseointegration Problem

  IT WAS REPORTED THAT THE PATIENT'S RIGHT HIP WAS REVISED DUE TO LOOSENING OF THE CONSTRAINED LINER WHICH WAS CEMENTED INTO THE SHELL. SURGEON REPORTED THAT HE FELT THE (STRYKER) CEMENT MANTLE WAS NOT ROBUST ENOUGH FOR THE LINER, AND THAT REVISION WAS PRIMARILY DUE TO THE PATIENT HAVING VERY LITTLE MUSCLE STRUCTURE. THE LINER AND FEMORAL HEAD WERE REVISED TO DEVICES OF THE SAME CATALOG NUMBER (DIFFERENT LOTS). REP REPORTED THAT NO FURTHER INFORMATION IS AVAILABLE.

  Patient problems: Inadequate Osseointegration; Injury

  MAUDE report 8752356 ↗
• InjuryJun 28, 2019Insufficient Device Problem Information; Insufficient Device Problem Information

  DR. REPORTED THE FOLLOWING: THE PATIENT THAT RECEIVED A CONSTRAINED LINER ON THE 23TH OF (B)(6) (PER 2067592) LUXATED THE LINER FROM THE TRITANIUM CUP. DR. MENTIONED THAT THE PATIENT IS DIFFICULT TO INSTRUCT. THE PRIMARY SURGERY TOOK PLACE IN 2014 (EXETER STEM AND TRITANIUM SOLID CUP). THERE WAS AN ACETABULAR REVISION IN 2017. AN MDM LINER WAS PLACED. THIS WAS LUXATED. REVISION SURGERY IS SCHEDULED ON JUNE THE 6TH. UPDATE (B)(6)2019 BY OLIVE FLOOD: THIS EVENT IS FOR THE 3RD REVISION SURGERY WHICH OCCURRED FOR THIS PATIENT ON 06 JUNE 2019. REVISION WAS DUE TO DISASSOCIATION BETWEEN THE TRIDENT LINER AND SHELL. TWO PREVIOUS REVISIONS (WHICH OCCURRED IN 2017 AND 23 (B)(6)2019) BOTH RELATE TO DISLOCATION. AN UNKNOWN EXETER STEM WAS ADDED TO THE PRODUCT GRID IN THIS COMPLAINT INVESTIGATION BASED ON THE MEDICAL REVIEW FOR LIMB LENGTH DISCREPANCY AND MIGRATION.

  Patient problems: Injury

  MAUDE report 8745597 ↗
• InjuryDec 13, 2018Insufficient Device Problem Information; Insufficient Device Problem Information

  REVISION OF TRIDENT CONSTRAINED POLY.

  Patient problems: Injury

  MAUDE report 8160107 ↗
• InjuryNov 12, 2018Device Dislodged or Dislocated; Device Dislodged or Dislocated

  FAILURE OF THE TRIDENT 0 DEGREE CONSTRAINT LINER. PER SALES REP., "THE INNER MECHANISM DISLODGED FROM THE OUTER SHELL OF THE CONSTRAINT LINER."

  Patient problems: Injury; Joint Dislocation

  MAUDE report 8059862 ↗
• InjuryJul 27, 2018Device Dislodged or Dislocated; Device Dislodged or Dislocated

  AS REPORTED: "PAIN AND DISLOCATION. PREVIOUS TROCHANTERIC FRACTURE. ALL AVAILABLE INFORMATION PROVIDED". PRE-REVISION X-RAY SHOWS THE METAL RING OF THE CONSTRAINED LINER AROUND THE FEMORAL HEAD, ALL OF WHICH IS OUT OF THE SHELL. PATIENT WAS REVISED TO AN MDM 38D LINER WITH A 22 +3 HEAD.

  Patient problems: Bone Fracture(s); Injury; Joint Dislocation

  MAUDE report 7728750 ↗
• InjuryJan 29, 2018Device Dislodged or Dislocated; Device Dislodged or Dislocated

  IT WAS REPORTED THAT PATIENT'S RIGHT HIP WAS REVISED AFTER THE STRYKER CONSTRAINED LINER DISASSOCIATED FROM A COMPETITOR'S SHELL.

  Patient problems: Injury

  MAUDE report 7225296 ↗
• MalfunctionFeb 27, 2017Break; Insufficient Device Problem Information; Insufficient Device Problem Information

  DURING ATTEMPT TO IMPLANT, THE CONSTRAINER LINER WAS DAMAGED (DENTS AND MARKINGS). THE LINER WOULD NOT LOCK INTO THE SHELL. THERE WAS NO DAMAGE TO THE "IN AND OUT" HEAD BUT IT WAS INSERTED IN THE CONSTRAINED LINER SO SURGEON DECIDED TO USE A NEW CONSTRAINED LINER AND HEAD.

  Patient problems: No Consequences Or Impact To Patient; No Known Impact Or Consequence To Patient

  MAUDE report 6363248 ↗