Rochester Medical Malpractice and Personal Injury Lawyer Blog
While most surgical procedures come with some degree of risk, certain complications are almost always the result of carelessness. The distinction between an unfortunate outcome and medical negligence can be difficult to determine, though, especially in cases involving complex surgical histories and multiple comorbidities. A recent ruling issued by a New York court in a medical malpractice case demonstrates how courts evaluate competing expert testimony and assess whether a malpractice claim should proceed to trial. If you have experienced serious complications following surgery, it is in your best interest to speak with a Rochester medical malpractice attorney about your rights.
History of the Case
It is reported that the plaintiff underwent a hysterectomy at the defendant’s hospital. At the time, the plaintiff was 65 years old. Her medical history included prior abdominal surgeries and breast cancer. During the procedure, the surgeon encountered abdominal adhesions that required them to convert the surgery from laparoscopy to open surgery. During the procedure, the surgeon identified and repaired intraoperative injuries to the bladder and small bowel. Complications arose that prompted a second surgery, during which another bowel perforation was discovered and repaired. The plaintiff subsequently developed sepsis, went into cardiac arrest, and endured a prolonged hospitalization that included additional surgeries and the placement of a colostomy.
It is further reported that the plaintiff later filed a lawsuit against the hospital, asserting medical malpractice and lack of informed consent. The plaintiff alleged that the surgical team failed to adequately inspect the bowel before closing the abdomen, which allowed the third bowel injury to go unnoticed. She also asserted that inadequate preoperative counseling and documentation supported a claim for lack of informed consent. The defendant moved for summary judgment, arguing that its providers complied with the standard of care and that the plaintiff’s injuries were unavoidable complications arising from her preexisting medical condition.
Conflicting Expert Testimony Precludes Summary Judgment
The court evaluated the defendant’s motion for summary judgment under New York’s framework requiring a prima facie showing of either no deviation from the standard of care or a lack of causation. In support of its motion, the defendant submitted an expert affirmation from a board-certified gynecologic oncologist. This expert opined that the surgical team met the standard of care in all respects and that the additional bowel injury could not have been reasonably identified during the initial surgery. He attributed the injury to the plaintiff’s hostile abdomen and diabetic status, which rendered her bowel wall vulnerable to delayed perforation.
The court noted that, in response, the plaintiff offered a conflicting expert opinion from a board-certified general surgeon. The plaintiff’s expert opined that the surgical team failed to investigate intraoperative bleeding during the initial surgery and did not sufficiently examine the bowel before closing. Further, the expert pointed to inconsistencies between operative notes and testimony and argued that the injuries were likely identifiable and repairable at the time of the first surgery. The expert also criticized the lack of documentation regarding key surgical techniques and postoperative monitoring.
Because both parties presented conflicting expert opinions on critical issues, namely whether the bowel was properly inspected, whether a general surgeon should have been consulted, and whether there was a delay in recognizing the leak, the court concluded that summary judgment was not appropriate.
Talk to a Dedicated Rochester Medical Malpractice Attorney
When patients experience significant complications following surgical procedures, they often wonder whether carelessness ultimately caused their harm. If you or a loved one suffered from a postoperative complication, the skilled Rochester medical malpractice attorneys at DeFrancisco & Falgiatano Personal Injury Lawyers can help determine whether you have a viable claim. Contact us at 833-200-2000 or reach out online to schedule a free and confidential consultation.
