Medical Malpractice Aorta Injury/Is There a Case?

[CKelly]

Jurisdiction

Georgia

My wife went in for a hiatal hernia repair and a TIF procedure. During the hernia repair, the aorta was injured, with the first two layers opened, leaving only the inner lining intact, but bulging.
I was consulted and a stent was recommended.
I agreed and the rest of the procedures were completed, then the stent was installed.
She spent the night in the ICU and was released the next day.
It's been two months and she has ongoing chest and groin pain that is sudden and severe. Scans have ruled out anything obvious.
The literature on the Medtronic Thoracic Stent Graft implant states that it requires annual, lifetime follow up. The vascular surgeon who was called in at the hospital where the surgery took place examined her at the one month mark and released her, saying nothing else was necessary and that the pain in her groin, chest and upper back was unrelated to the stent.
Is there a reason to pursue a case for the damage to the aorta, resulting in a stent?

 

[adjusterjack]

the pain in her groin, chest and upper back

You're going to have to determine the cause and source of those pains.

Though you might have a case that the need for the stent was caused by medical negligence.

Consult a malpractice attorney and review your options.

 

[Tax Counsel]

Is there a reason to pursue a case for the damage to the aorta, resulting in a stent?

The reason for the aorta damage matters a great deal, and I don't have the medical records to know that. A bad outcome does not itself tell you whether negligence was involved. It's hard to imagine what the surgeon might have done during a hernia repair that would have caused it. Her aorta may have already been weakened and the stress of surgery finally caused the damage that required the stent. In any operation there is some risk of unexpected complications. The doctors should have discussed that with your wife and had hwe sign the informed consent form. Your wife will want to see a medical malpractice attorney about this. The attorney can get the medical records and have an expert review them to see if there is anything that suggests negligence.

 

[CKelly]

We have 119 pages of medical records and have reviewed them carefully. There was no prior knowledge of any aorta damage or defect. It was made clear to us that the aorta injury was caused when the esophagus was loosened or removed from the aorta during the hernia repair. The damage to the aorta occurred when the surgeon "knicked" the aorta... that was mentioned by the nurse.
A groin scan is scheduled later this week to see what might be causing the groin pain on both sides which coincides with the stent entry sites.
The chest pain is directly at the stent site, but also where the mesh and esophagus work was primarily done. We suspect nerve pain and all scans indicate no major problems... it is very disconcerting to have sudden, severe chest pain directly under the left breast that lasts from minutes to hours.
This is very intermittent, but sometimes she will just have moderate discomfort in that same area.
We hope that the pain will dissipate over the next few months, but it hasn't been easy and explanations are vague.
Our real concern is that my wife went in with a healthy aorta and came out with a stent. Is this stent alone cause for legal action? The hospital and doctors that performed the stent say that they don't cause pain and that no future follow ups are needed. The medical device card that came with the stent indicates that lifetime annual follow ups.
are required.
Our insurance company has sent us paperwork asking if we are suing.
Do we have a case?
Should we sue?
There is another anomaly in the medical records that we discovered that is surprising. It may not relate to the injury, but it's curious.
There is a cardiac record that indicates there may have been a myocardial infarction at an unknown prior time (age unknown). The cardiologist confirmed this to the surgeons two days before the surgery... he did not clear for surgery or not clear for surgery, only confirmed his prior records and results. Surgery proceeded without our knowledge of any of this.
This may be routine, but we weren't made aware of any of this until we read it in her medical records.
After the surgery and ecg was performed and notes indicate "resolved" in relation to the mi... (I need to re read these notes"
Is this stent going to be a risk factor or require follow ups?
Incidentally, one of the "critical care" sections of the exploration of benefits states that this portion of the medical care was out of network and thus, not covered by our insurance. We haven't received the bill yet..
Suggestions?

 

[army judge]

Suggestions?

Make contact with at least FIVE attorneys near you that primarily handle medical malpractice cases.

As soon as possible, book appointments with THREE of the aforementioned FIVE.

Take all of your documentary materials with you when you visit with the attorneys in person.

The purpose of your appointments serve as the basis for you to determine which attorney you can partner with is best positioned to be your spouse's champion.

Make sure you conduct your due diligence regarding the five best medical malpractice attorneys in your county BEFORE booking your appointments.

Good luck.

 

[Zigner]

A big (huge) question is whether this sort of complication necessarily indicates malpractice and not just a known possible complication in the surgery. You (plural) need to speak to a few medical malpractice attorneys for a review of the matter.

I wish your wife the best in her recovery.

 

[Tax Counsel]

Our real concern is that my wife went in with a healthy aorta and came out with a stent. Is this stent alone cause for legal action?

No. That fact alone does not tell you what caused the problem with the aorta and whether that was due to negligence of someone in the operating room.

Our insurance company has sent us paperwork asking if we are suing.
Do we have a case?
Should we sue?

No one on an internet message board forum can answer those questions for you. The only persons who can are attorneys who practice medical malpractice cases in the state where the operation took place. As armyjudge indicates, your wife may want to see more than one attorney (though I wouldn't say she needs to see five or more necessarily). Going with the first attorney she sees could be mistake. Note that generally medical malpractice attorneys give free or low cost initial consultations, so your wife wouldn't have to expend much money to get the initial consultation and find out what a few attorneys think and, if there is a case, which attorney she prefers to hire.

Is this stent going to be a risk factor or require follow ups?

That's something your wife's doctors will have to tell her. I wouldn't be surprised that some ongoing monitoring of some kind would be needed, but I'm not a doctor and more importantly I'm not HER doctor.

Incidentally, one of the "critical care" sections of the exploration of benefits states that this portion of the medical care was out of network and thus, not covered by our insurance. We haven't received the bill yet..
Suggestions?

Georgia has a surprise billing Act. The Georgia Department of Insurance has issued regulations that provide further detail on that law. It may be that the medical bill will have to be limited to what an in-network provider would get.

 

[adjusterjack]

Our insurance company has sent us paperwork asking if we are suing.

That's because your insurance company likely has a right of reimbursement (check your policy) of its costs, from your settlement or award.

Even if you said no now, and you changed your mind later, there would still be the right of reimbursement.

 

[stealthy1]

We have 119 pages of medical records and have reviewed them carefully.

Are either of you medical professionals? That's who should review the records.

 

[CKelly]

Neither of us are medical professionals, but both of us are well versed enough to read the reports.

We understand that we are likely going to need to see an attorney or two. We wanted to run the information by this group to make sure it is even worth the trouble of going that route.

We are not particularly interested in suing, but if this is likely to cause problems in the future or changes her risk profile, we want to be compensated .

We have been to probably a dozen different medical appointments and not gotten what I would call a straight answer yet.

To clarify: the surgeon repairing the hiatal hernia caused the aorta injury during the procedure.
So, now my wife has a stent in her aorta...
Good case?
Not much of a case?
Looking for opinions and realize we're going to need a good attorney, but we aren't in a hurry to further complicate our lives as we both work in our company business.

 

[adjusterjack]

We are not particularly interested in suing, but if this is likely to cause problems in the future or changes her risk profile, we want to be compensated .

Reality check. Nobody's compensating anybody for anything without a lawsuit on the horizon. Nobody is giving out any information without a lawsuit on the horizon. Nobody is admitting anything without having their feet put to the fire in a deposition.

Looking for opinions and realize we're going to need a good attorney, but we aren't in a hurry to further complicate our lives as we both work in our company business.

Bottom line. Either consult an attorney or give up the idea of ever seeing a nickel from the medical providers. Your choice.

 

[Redemptionman]

Yeah this is a tricky one, since doctors hate being sued and will always side with the insurance companies. You need to find a very specialized attorney, several attorneys have medical degrees as well so if you could find a former vascular surgeon focusing on malpractice cases this will be more beneficial to you. May have to find one out of your state who works with other attorneys in your state or is licensed to practice in your state.

Once you sue the current set of doctors you will need to find another set since they will drop you completely plus I doubt you really want to see the doctor who accidentally cut your wives Aorta. Georgia caps non economic damages at $350k which is substantial so you should be able to find an attorney but keep in mind these cases cost probably at least that much to bring to trial and any award you get, you will be lucky to see half of that money. Also, do you work have any catastrophic disability or life insurance of any kind? That is also a pool of money that you can try to go after.

 

[Tax Counsel]

cGeorgia caps non economic damages at $350k which is substantial so you should be able to find an attorney but keep in mind these cases cost probably at least that much to bring to trial and any award you get, you will be lucky to see half of that money.

Most of these cases do not cost nearly so much to litigate as you imply. Sure, they aren't cheap, so suing for malpractice for small injuries is not generally a financially winning thing to do. But the litigation cost likely won't be that large unless the award was something close to $750,000. Bear in mind that the legal fees are a percentage of the amount recovered for the client, so the legal fees won't eat up all of the award, regardless of what the judgement was. It's the costs other than legal fees that help make it expensive, like expert testimony, etc. But those generally aren't going to reach the kind of levels you indicate in most cases, including one like the OP has.

 

[Redemptionman]

Most of these cases do not cost nearly so much to litigate as you imply. Sure, they aren't cheap, so suing for malpractice for small injuries is not generally a financially winning thing to do. But the litigation cost likely won't be that large unless the award was something close to $750,000. Bear in mind that the legal fees are a percentage of the amount recovered for the client, so the legal fees won't eat up all of the award, regardless of what the judgement was. It's the costs other than legal fees that help make it expensive, like expert testimony, etc. But those generally aren't going to reach the kind of levels you indicate in most cases, including one like the OP has.

Whatever, I will play for a firm to take this they will probably take at least 50-60 percent of any verdict by the time legal fees and expert testimony is rendered. This is not an easy case and quick turn and burn PI firms won't touch it. Similar to UIM/ UM cases, the easiest ones are always going to be with clear liability and deep pockets.

Either way, I hope the OP finds their attorney quickly.

 

[CKelly]

We begin the process of searching for the right attorney to handle this. I do realize that it will require a specialist as this is not the average case.
Our medical bills (according to the insurance company)for this little adventure are 685k so far without adjustments... I just found that out.
Also: the vascular surgeon who works for the hospital where the operation was done said that she needed no follow up... ever..
The medical literature for this stent states that it requires an annual checkup for life.
After getting a second opinion and a scan by a different vascular surgeon, because her pain levels were off the charts and none of the other doctors would order anything that would happen this month, we were told that my wife would absolutely, without fail, need an annual review of the stent.
So, why in the world would the vascular surgeon that performed the stent implantation say that no follow up were ever needed?

 

[CKelly]

Clarification:
685k is for the entire year and includes a hip surgery

 

[Tax Counsel]

Clarification:
685k is for the entire year and includes a hip surgery

One of the challenges in a case like is separating out what medical costs are attributable to the alleged malpractice and what costs you would have had the malpractice not occurred. It's not always easy to make a clear line between the two, and gets even fuzzier for noneconomic damages like pain and suffering. That's where a lot of the fight in these cases can occur. A good malpractice lawyer will work to ensure you get everything you should for any damages from malpractice. You'd still have to pay the bills not related to malpractice, of course. I hope you had some decent medical insurance to cover most of these costs.