Medscape recently had an article on a case
affecting a Connecticut physician that was practicing the standard of care, but
still got sued.
The case involved woman who had a strong family history of breast cancer. In 2005, the woman had an elective partial hysterectomy for uterine fibroids, which is benign. Whether or not to remove the ovaries too, during the hysterectomy was also considered. The benefit to removing the ovaries is eliminating the risk for ovarian cancer. The negative effects of removal are, if the woman is pre-menopausal, removing the ovaries will mean she will be menopausal post surgery and assume the risks of that condition.
During the pre-operative consult, the physician did note the patient's family history of breast cancer, which suggests a higher risk of ovarian cancer as well. However, the physician did not order a pre-operative genetic evaluation searching for the BRCA gene. This gene, if present, would indicate the patient had a much higher chance of growing ovarian or breast cancer later on.
The hysterectomy was a success, and the ovaries weren't removed. Yet, one year later, the patient was diagnosed with late stage, terminal ovarian cancer that had metastasized to the abdomen. The patient sued the doctor for medical malpractice.
As it turned out, the BRCA gene was negative when the patient was ultimately tested. If the test had been done pre-operatively, most physicians would have proposed that the ovaries not be removed. This fact was not admitted in court. The patient simply alleged that given her family history, the ovaries should have been removed, regardless of the fact that it was not accepted medical practice.
The jury found in favor of the plaintiff and awarded her $4 million dollars. The physician lost on lost on appeal to the Connecticut Supreme Court. His malpractice insurance only covered $1 million dollars so the doctor's financial assets were attached to cover the judgment.
To learn more, contact us!
The case involved woman who had a strong family history of breast cancer. In 2005, the woman had an elective partial hysterectomy for uterine fibroids, which is benign. Whether or not to remove the ovaries too, during the hysterectomy was also considered. The benefit to removing the ovaries is eliminating the risk for ovarian cancer. The negative effects of removal are, if the woman is pre-menopausal, removing the ovaries will mean she will be menopausal post surgery and assume the risks of that condition.
During the pre-operative consult, the physician did note the patient's family history of breast cancer, which suggests a higher risk of ovarian cancer as well. However, the physician did not order a pre-operative genetic evaluation searching for the BRCA gene. This gene, if present, would indicate the patient had a much higher chance of growing ovarian or breast cancer later on.
The hysterectomy was a success, and the ovaries weren't removed. Yet, one year later, the patient was diagnosed with late stage, terminal ovarian cancer that had metastasized to the abdomen. The patient sued the doctor for medical malpractice.
As it turned out, the BRCA gene was negative when the patient was ultimately tested. If the test had been done pre-operatively, most physicians would have proposed that the ovaries not be removed. This fact was not admitted in court. The patient simply alleged that given her family history, the ovaries should have been removed, regardless of the fact that it was not accepted medical practice.
The jury found in favor of the plaintiff and awarded her $4 million dollars. The physician lost on lost on appeal to the Connecticut Supreme Court. His malpractice insurance only covered $1 million dollars so the doctor's financial assets were attached to cover the judgment.
To learn more, contact us!
No comments:
Post a Comment