- The jury awarded the plaintiff $5 million.
Jury finds oophorectomy was appropriate
Madison (Ky) Circuit Court
A 33-year-old mother of 3 who did not want more children underwent laparoscopic vaginal hysterectomy for heavy menstrual cycles and pelvic pain. Both ovaries were removed and the patient was placed on long-term hormone therapy.
After surgery the woman claimed she did not consent to have her ovaries removed. The patient contended (although the physician denied) that when she confronted the physician about the ovary removal he responded, “I must be senile.”
The physician asserted that he told the patient he would visualize the entire area and repair whatever was necessary. During the procedure, the physician found that both ovaries were severely adherent to the uterus and that one had a cyst. The physician claimed that the decision to remove the ovaries was the appropriate treatment.
- The jury returned a defense verdict.
Ureter injury during hysterectomy leads to nephrectomy
Adair County (Mo) Circuit Court
Despite several adjustments in hormone replacement therapy, a 66-year-old woman had vaginal bleeding lasting longer than 1 year. Distressed by the bleeding, she said she would consider hysterectomy.
The physician to whom she was referred discussed a dilatation and curettage (D&C) and a hysterectomy, gave her literature on both procedures, and arranged for her to see an interactive video about the 2 procedures. The woman opted for a hysterectomy. After a history and physical examination the next month, both options were again discussed, and again she chose a hysterectomy.
During laparoscopic vaginal hysterectomy several months later, an inadvertent cystotomy was performed and both ureters avulsed. Another surgeon reimplanted the ureters and placed stents, which were removed after 6 weeks. Three months later the right kidney showed signs of reduced function. The woman declined reimplantation of the right ureter. Thereafter, she had abdominal, flank, low back, and leg pain. Nearly 7 years later, her right kidney was removed.
In suing, the woman claimed the hysterectomy was unnecessary and argued that she should have undergone either a D&C or endometrial ablation. She also asserted the physician performed the operation in the wrong plane, thereby damaging the ureters and bladder.
The physician contended that the surgery was within the standard of care for the woman’s condition and that the injury was a known potential complication that was discovered intraoperatively and repaired. He contended that the injury was caused by a Deaver retractor used during the repair surgery.
- The jury returned a defense verdict.
Patient’s request for fetal reduction too late?
San Bernardino County (Calif) Superior Court
At 10 weeks’ gestation, a woman pregnant with quadruplets discussed fetal reduction with her obstetrician to increase her chances of giving birth to a healthy infant(s). Her next appointment was 5 weeks later.
When she returned to the clinic, she was told it was too late to perform selective termination. About 12 weeks later the woman gave birth to quadruplets. One died within 24 hours from hyaline membrane disease and 2 have cerebral palsy. The fourth child is healthy.
In suing, the woman claimed the obstetrician did not inform her that his practice had a policy prohibiting fetal reduction after 14 weeks’ gestation and failed to refer her to a perinatologist who could have performed the procedure.
The health maintenance organization claimed they told the woman about their policy against performing selective termination after 14 weeks and that she had declined to have the procedure before that time.
- The case settled for $2.6 million.
Improper diagnosis leads to premature birth
Baltimore County (Md) Circuit Court
A woman reported to the hospital at 25 weeks’ gestation complaining of abdominal pressure and contractions. The physician diagnosed a shortened cervix and discharged her.
Before the woman left the hospital she began to bleed, and an emergency cesarean section was performed.
In suing, the woman charged that the physician failed to properly treat the signs of premature labor. The child, who is now 3 years old, is blind, has cerebral palsy, is unable to communicate, and has limited mental status. The defendants argued that the treatment given was appropriate.
- The jury awarded the plaintiff $6.9 million.