WHEN Jane Webb began experiencing pain in her right hip 18 months ago, she had no idea it would lead to major joint replacement surgery and legal action.

But today Mrs Webb, aged 60, from Newport, is among 25 people in Wales, and 180 to date across the UK, to join a group legal action against a manufacturer of hip replacement technology.

In October 2007, she underwent an operation known as hip resurfacing, usually offered to younger patients as an alternative to full joint replacement.

Then in her early 50s - she had lived with osteo-arthritis since the age of 40 - the resurfacing procedure was meant to last 15-20 years, delaying a full replacement until she was in her 70s.

But after hospital checks in September 2013, a blood test revealed raised levels of metal ions, an indication that the metal-on-metal hip resurfacing technology she had been fitted with was failing.

An operation last July revealed she was suffering from an adverse reaction to metal debris (ARMD), the metal-on-metal components having rubbed against each other and leached into surrounding tissue and her bloodstream. A full hip replacement was required, also involving cutting away damaged tissue.

The difficulty of carrying out a full replacement on a compromised joint has caused further problems. Mrs Webb required further surgery after suffering a hip dislocation late last year, currently has to wear a large hip brace, and is "virtually housebound" for the coming weeks.

"I had good years (after the hip resurfacing operation) but when it started to go wrong it was menacingly awful," said Mrs Webb.

“I can’t drive, shower, do anything one takes for granted on a day-to-day basis.

"I'm not sure if my mobility will return to what I want. I feel very bitter, like I have been robbed.

"The whole experience has been so drawn out. I simply want redress for the injuries caused.”

She is part of a Group Litigation Action (GLO) against Zimmer GMBH and Zimmer Limited, the manufacturer of the Zimmer Durom hip resurfacing system.

This has been fitted into around 2,000 UK patients since 2003, but many more have had Zimmer Durom components fitted as part of total hip replacements.

In a statement, the company said: "Zimmer believes that the Durom Cup is a safe and effective medical device when used as intended.

"The first and only trial of any case involving a Durom Cup occurred in the United States in November 2014, and resulted in a unanimous defence verdict.

"Zimmer is reviewing the GLO and does not have any further comment at this time."

Other litigation is ongoing in the USA however, and the High Court in London has approved the GLO for those claiming the system caused injury or illness.

A steering committee of four law firms, including Wales-based Hugh James, has been appointed to represent claimants.

Mark Harvey, partner and head of the claimant division at Hugh James, said it is alleged that the Zimmer Durom system has a much higher failure rate than similar hip replacement systems, while revision surgery often leads to further trauma due to tissue damage caused by the metal reaction.

“The injury is alleged to be caused by ARMD and in some a failure of the implant to bond with the bone," he said.

"Each patient who has received a metal-on-metal hip prosthesis should have been contacted by their hospital so they can be monitored, even if they aren’t suffering from any symptoms.

“If patients have pain, raised metal ions level in their blood, and if x-rays show fluid collections around their hip joint, or a loosening of the joint, they may need to have the hip implants removed and replaced.”

Anyone wishing to pursue a claim may join the GLO by being added to the group register of claims, but must come forward as soon as possible.

For further information contact the Hugh James helpline on 0800 652 5589.