Maryland Medical Malpractice Lawyer Blog

A New York state jury has awarded a $2.4 million verdict to a woman in a medical malpractice case. The woman underwent partial bowel removal surgery that should not have been performed, causing her to spend 2 ½ months in the hospital and have three more procedures to fix the complications. During the next few months, she was admitted to three hospitals and had to undergo two other surgeries to take care of infections and complications from the first procedure. As a result of her condition, she now is unable to control her bowels, lives with severe pain and has terrible scars. The jury’s verdict consisted of $2.2 million for the woman and $200,000 for her husband. A copy of the article regarding the case can be found here.

As an experienced Baltimore, Maryland medical malpractice lawyer, I have handled a number of medical malpractice cases involving the bowels. Some have been negligent bowel injury cases from procedures such as minimally invasive surgery. These injuries frequently cause major complications because the bowel has so much bacteria in it. Other bowel malpractice cases that I have handled have involved the failure to timely diagnose and treat mesenteric ischemia, which is the lack of proper blood supply to the bowel, causing death of the bowel. These are extremely painful and devastating injuries. To see some of the cases I have handled, click here.

A Kentucky jury has award $4.6 million to a couple in a medical malpractice case. The couple claimed that a urologist performed a negligent medical procedure on the husband causing permanent personal injuries. The verdict included $3,750,000 to the husband for pain and suffering, $117,612 for medical expenses and $750,000 to the wife. A copy of the article regarding the case can be found here.

As an experienced Baltimore, Maryland medical malpractice lawyer, I have handled a number of urology cases. One involved negligent anesthesia during urological procedures, while another involved the failure to recognize a spinal cord tumor that was causing incontinence. This is an extremely large verdict for such a case. While the newspaper article didn’t identify the particular injury, it must have been severe.

An Alabama jury has awarded $20 million in a medical malpractice case in which a woman died after receiving negligent anesthesia care. The woman, a wife and mother of two, died in 2006 after receiving anesthesia during exploratory surgery. The woman, who had been suffering from severe abdominal pain, aspirated bile from her stomach into her lungs, causing aspiration pneumonia. The family claimed that the defendant doctors did not examine the woman’s abdomen or look at her medical records before the exploratory surgery, which would have revealed her risk factors for breathing fluid into her lungs. A copy of the article regarding the case can be found here.

As an experienced Baltimore, Maryland medical malpractice lawyer, I have handled a number of medical malpractice cases, including some involving the negligent administration of anesthesia. In one case, a woman died from improper monitoring during anesthesia. In another case, a patient died of aspiration pneumonia during the days after surgery. These are tragic cases. They can easily be prevented with just even the minimum care and attention. To see some of the cases I have handled, click here.

The New York Times published a detailed article this past weekend on radiation overdose malpractice in New York hospitals. The article reports a number of shocking instances of people who have been given too much radiation during treatment for various cancers. Many of them have suffered terrible health complications from this malpractice, including gaping wounds, loss of hearing, sight, the ability to heal, walk and otherwise function. A copy of the article can be found here.

A Missouri woman has settled a medical malpractice lawsuit for $2.5 million. The woman was treated at University Hospital in early 2005 for dehydration, which was the result of a gastrointestinal condition. Apparently, doctors infused her with nutritional supplements through an IV in her subclavian artery, just below the collarbone, instead of the subclavian vein, where it was supposed to go. This caused fatty blockages to travel to her brain for five consecutive days, causing severe strokes and neurological and mental impairment. She is mentally and physically handicapped as a result. A copy of the article regarding this case can be found here.

As an experienced Baltimore, Maryland medical malpractice lawyer, I have handled a number of medical malpractice cases involving the incorrect administration of mediation or nutrition through IVs. These cases usually involve clear medical negligence as the wrong product (medication or nutrition), dosage or entry point is used. In one case, a hospital gave the wrong medication dosage to a patient causing the patient to die. The error was clear from the medical records. In another case, a woman was given 5 times the proper dosage of nutrition supplement causing her to go into cardiac arrest and die. These are terribly upsetting cases because they can easily be prevented with just a little care and attention. To see some of the cases I have handled, click here.

A Massachusetts jury has found that two doctors at Children’s Hospital Boston were guilty of medical malpractice that caused the death of a 3-year-old boy, and awarded the parents $15 million. The boy died a year and a half after he underwent surgery for a birth defect. The child was born with a severe congenital heart defect called Tetralogy of Fallot, a complicated but treatable birth defect that affects the flow of blood through the heart. He underwent eight procedures, 7 of which were cardiac catheterizations, before coming to Children’s for another catheterization procedure to widen his arteries. After the Boston procedure, the child suffered a seizure. A CAT scan revealed that that contrast dye, which is used during the procedure to better see the patient’s anatomy, had leaked into his brain. Later, an MRI revealed that a piece of metal had lodged in the boy’s brain, probably from a medical instrument. When the child left the hospital, he was unable to walk or speak. The jury awarded damages of $5 million for the child’s pain and suffering, $5 million for the parents’ loss of their child, and $5 million for the child’s wrongful death. A copy of the article regarding the case can be found here.

According to the lawyers involved in the case, the parties reached a “high-low” settlement prior to the jury’s verdict. Such settlements can be structured in many different ways, but usually it means that the plaintiff will get a certain amount of money guaranteed (the low) in exchange for agreeing that no matter how high the verdict is the defendants will not have to pay more than a particular amount (the high). Usually, the plaintiff gets the low even if he/she loses the case. But sometimes the settlement agreements are structured so that the defendant only pays the money if the plaintiff wins the case. If the verdict is between the high and low, then the plaintiff gets that amount. These agreements can be beneficial to both sides to protect each side from their worst case scenario – in other words, it protects the plaintiff from losing the case completely and it protects the defendant(s) from a large verdict.

As an experienced Baltimore, Maryland medical malpractice lawyer, I have handled a number of medical malpractice cases involving sick children, and have done a number of high-low settlements. They are extremely complicated and require expertise that most general personal injury attorneys do not have. To see some of the cases I have handled, click here.

Washington state has agreed to pay $1.3 million to settle a medical malpractice lawsuit that was brought by one of its former hospitals by a man who escaped out of the window of a county-owned mental hospital and hurt himself jumping onto a fire-escape landing. It was alleged that, while the man was being held in a “seclusion room,” he was not adequately monitored by the hospital and that the room was not adequately secured. The man climbed out of a window, walked along a narrow area, and then jumped to the roof of an adjacent area, which enabled him to reach the roof of another building. He then jumped to the fire escape landing. The man suffered multiple fractures in the fall. A copy of the article regarding this case can be found here.

As an experienced Baltimore, Maryland medical malpractice lawyer, I and my office have successfully handled a number of cases in which people are injured or killed due to the failure of those in charge of persons to properly care for them. In one case, a psychologist and psychologist who saw a psychotic patient in an emergency room improperly discharged him, resulting in the patient’s suicide the next day. In another case, a hospital failed to properly restrain and monitor a patient, causing his death from asphyxiation. In yet another case, a teenager at a youth facility was improperly put into a prone restraint, asphyxiated and killed.

These cases require a knowledge of how hospitals and residential facilities operate, and the standard of care in those facilities. They also require a knowledge of practices and procedure in such facilities, and the experts who can testify in such cases.

There has been a lot of publicity lately about a doctor at St. Joseph Medical Center in Towson, Maryland, that supposedly implanted cardiac stents that may not have been necessary. The publicity started after St. Joseph Medical Center sent out letters to 369 former patients stating that a review of surgeries by Dr. Mark Midei revealed that Dr. Midei may have told these people that they had severe coronary artery blockages that they actually didn’t have, and then recommend and performed stent surgery on these people when it was not necessary. Usually, such stents are only placed in people who have blockages of 70% or more. A copy of the article regarding this issue can be found here.

In the article, a women is quoted who was told that she had a 90% blockage and underwent stent surgery as a result, but after getting a letter discovered that she only had a 10% blockage and didn’t need the surgery. Not only did she undergo unnecessary surgery, but she incorrectly believed she had severe cardiac disease and now has to take blood thinners for life due to the stent.

There are clearly a lot of unanswered questions here. Who was reading the heart scans and incorrectly interpreting / reporting on them, why did Dr. Midei not pick up on this, why did St. Joseph Medical Center not pick up on this earlier, were there financial incentives for any of these parties that gave them incentive to do this, etc.

Another problem will be fairly compensating for such a large number of claimants. Most doctors in Maryland only carry $1 million in medical malpractice insurance, though some have $2 or $3 million. His employer, a professional group of doctors, may have some more malpractice insurance or assets, but probably not much more than the doctor. The real deep pocket here is St. Joseph. If there is any liability on St. Joe’s behalf, then the insurance and assets available to satisfy malpractice judgments clearly is a lot more than what the doctor and his group have.

Recently, a lot of attorneys have been advertising for such cases the newspaper and on television. These attorneys will be collecting as many cases as they can. An attorney who has a large number of cases cannot possibly try those cases in any reasonable time period. As such, in my experience, people are better served by attorneys pursuing a limited number of cases.

As an experienced Baltimore, Maryland medical malpractice lawyer, I only take about a dozen large med mal cases a year. I think it better serves my clients.

One common type of malpractice concerns the failure of a clinician or radiologist to properly diagnose a patient's musculoskeletal tumor based on the relevant clinical and radiological features. One sub-type of these musculoskeletal tumors is a cartilage tumor, a tumor that grows within a human bone.

Musculoskeletal tumors are benign or malignant lesions that form in human bone and the connective tissues. Cartilage tumors are musculoskeletal tumors that produce cartilage inside the host bone. There are only two types of cartilage tumors: enchondroma (benign) and chondrosarcoma (malignant). Cartilage tumors range in severity from benign enchondroma to low-grade malignant chondrosarcoma to high grade chondrosarcoma. Chondrosarcoma is the second most common primary malignant bone tumor, accounting for 25-30% of all primary bony malignancies.

Several well-established clinical guideposts and principles exist regarding location, size, presence and duration of pain, and age of the patient, that assist physicians in distinguishing a benign enchondroma from a low-grade malignant chondrosarcoma. Clinically, benign enchondromas most commonly involve the tubular bones of the hands and feet. When present in long bones, such as the femur, enchondromas most often are located in the distal femur (furthest from the hip). Enchondromas are usually asymptomatic; i.e., with no associated pain, and therefore, the vast majority are discovered incidentally on radiographs or bone scans done for other reasons. The majority of enchondromas are approximately 3 cm in maximum dimension. Benign tumors larger than 5 cm in maximum dimension are extremely rare. In contrast, chondrosarcomas are most commonly located in the proximal femur (closest to the hip) and pelvis. Like other malignant tumors, the single most common clinical symptom for chondrosarcoma is the presentation with pain that is directly referable to the bone in which the tumor is growing. Published literature indicates that the pain is typically present for 1-2 years prior to diagnosis and is most often described by patients as an insidious or achy pain that is initially constant in nature, but that ultimately progresses in severity. Generally, patients with chondrosarcoma are over the age of 40, while those with benign enchondroma are typically under the age of 40.

Radiographs are crucial in distinguishing between benign enchondroma and low-grade chondrosarcoma. Perhaps the single most important radiographic feature for a cartilage tumor is whether the tumor is confined to the inside of the bone or has grown outside of it. The radiologic hallmark of a chondrosarcoma is evidence of the tumor breaking through the cortex (outer shell) of the bone and extending into the soft tissues surrounding the bone. This is often referred to as “cortical extension” leading to a “soft tissue mass.” Importantly, benign enchondromas simply do not break through the bone’s cortex, but rather, remain well circumscribed within the bone. The best radiologic modality for evaluating whether cortical breakthrough/extension has occurred is an MRI. A second common radiographic feature of chondrosarcoma that can be visualized best on an MRI is when the tumor appears heterogenous in signal intensity (a number of different structural variations) as opposed to homogenous (multiple identical structures), a feature that is more consistent with a benign enchondroma.

The CT scan is the next best modality used to distinguish between an enchondroma and chondrosarcoma. In contrast to the MRI, which is most useful at detecting the presence of a soft tissue mass, CT scans are particularly useful at evaluating the integrity of the bone’s cortex. Because enchondromas never break through the bone’s cortex, a CT image of an enchondroma is expected to have an intact rind of cortical bone surrounding it. To the extent that cortical irregularity or cortical erosion is observed, this is considered strong evidence of malignancy/chondrosarcoma. Lastly, in some instances, cartilage tumors can be observed on plain x-rays. To the extent that a malignant tumor has broken through the bone, clinicians can, in some instances, observe areas of calcification outside the bone in the area of cortical breakthrough.

At STSW, our attorneys have successfully handled cases involving a physician's failure to properly diagnose a patient with a malignant cartilage tumor, e.g. a chondrosarcoma. If you or a loved one believe that you have been the victim of a missed or untimely diagnosis of a malignant musculoskeletal or soft tissue tumor of any kind, call the lawyers at STSW for a free consultation at 410-385-2225.