DEFENDANT'S VERDICT - MEDICAL MALPRACTICE - HOSPITAL NEGLIGENCE - PLAINTIFF'S DECEDENT HIGH-RISK PATIENT WHO UNDERWENT STENT PLACEMENT AND SUBSEQUENT VASCULAR SURGERY - STENT THROMBOSIS - WRONGFUL DEATH - PLAINTIFF MAINTAINS DEFENDANT DEVIATED FROM STANDARD OF CARE - DEFENDANT HOSPITAL DENIES NEGLIGENCE OR DEVIATION FROM STANDARD OF CARE AND ARGUES DECEDENT'S OUTCOME DUE TO UNDERLYING CONDITIONS AND IT WAS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ACTIONS OF MEDICAL PROVIDERS NEGLIGENCE.

Pages10-12
DEFENDANT’S VERDICT – MEDICAL MALPRACTICE – HOSPITAL NEGLIGENCE –
PLAINTIFF’S DECEDENT HIGH-RISK PATIENT WHO UNDERWENT STENT PLACEMENT
AND SUBSEQUENT VASCULAR SURGERY – STENT THROMBOSIS – WRONGFUL DEATH
– PLAINTIFF MAINTAINS DEFENDANT DEVIATED FROM STANDARD OF CARE –
DEFENDANT HOSPITAL DENIES NEGLIGENCE OR DEVIATION FROM STANDARD OF
CARE AND ARGUES DECEDENT’S OUTCOME DUE TO UNDERLYING CONDITIONS AND
IT WAS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ACTIONS OF MEDICAL PROVIDERS NEGLIGENCE.
Pinellas County, FL
In this medical malpractice case, the plaintiff
asserted that the defendant hospital and its
employees were negligent in treatment of the
plaintiff’s decedent resulting in his death. The
plaintiff settled or dismissed her complaint against
the defendant individual physicians and the case
proceeded as to the defendant hospital only. The
defendant denied negligence or deviation of the
standard of care and asserted that all treatment
of the plaintiff’s decedent was appropriate, given
his presentation.
On April 30, 2016, the plaintiff’s decedent presented to
the defendant’s emergency room with complaints of a
painful right foot and lower extremity. The plaintiff’s de-
cedent had a history of peripheral vascular disease in
his right lower extremity and had a previous right
iliofemoral bypass graft in the right lower leg, as well as a
history of diabetes melitus. The plaintiff was placed on
Heparin for the right lower leg and a consult was ob-
tained with vascular surgery for evaluation of the right
lower leg and with cardiology for evaluation of an ab-
normal EKG and troponin. The plaintiff underwent a CT
angiogram and a vascular surgery consult.
At that time, it was noted that his pain had resolved but
that the leg felt cool. Changes in EKG and cardiac en-
zymes, consistent with an acute myocardial infarction,
were also noted. Since the right leg was not in need of
emergent intervention, any discussion of a vascular sur-
gery would be delayed pending a cardiac work-up. The
plaintiff was seen by a cardiologist who noted that the
plaintiff may have had a small, non-ST elevated myo-
cardial infarction and, since vascular surgery was not
emergent, he recommended that the plaintiff be sent
to the cardiac cath lab to evaluate for progression of his
coronary artery disease.
On May 1, 2016, the plaintiff had consults with both the
cardiologist and vascular surgeon. The physicians
agreed that the plaintiff could undergo the cardiac
catheterization but indicated that a surgery to open up
the grafts in the lower leg would be necessary after the
cardiac work-up was complete. The plaintiff underwent
cardiac catheterization on May 2, 2016. During the di-
agnostic portion of the procedure, the cardiologist
noted that the patient had a stent in his LAD from a pre-
vious procedure, a total chronic occlusion of the RCA
and severe disease involving the circumflex marginal
and mid-circumflex. At that time, the cardiac surgeon
placed 2 drug-eluting stents in the circumflex artery and
the obtuse marginal. On May 6, 2016 the patient
underwent a right femoral to tibial bypass graft surgery.
On May 10, 2016, the decedent was scheduled to be
discharged home; however, he developed dizziness, fa-
tigue, shortness of breath and chest pain which required
a rapid response team to be called. Shortly thereafter,
an EKG showed marked abnormalities and he was re-
ferred back to the cardiac catheterization lab where
thrombosis in the area of the stent placement in the left
circumflex artery was discovered. This resulted in a mas-
sive myocardial infarction and the decedent’s condition
deteriorated until he ultimately died on May 11, 2016.
The plaintiff contended that the defendant was aware
that the patient had multi-vessel coronary artery disease
and should also have been aware that he suffered from
diabetes melitus. The defendant should also have
known that patients such as the decedent are at a high
risk for stent thrombosis when they undergo a non-car-
diac surgery within 2 weeks of stent placement. Further,
the plaintiff argued that the defendant was or should
have been aware that the patient was going to have a
vascular surgery performed within 2 weeks of the place-
ment of the drug-eluting stents.
The plaintiff contended that the defendant deviated
from the standard of care in its negligent evaluation, as-
sessment, diagnosis, care, treatment and management
of the plaintiff’s decedent. The plaintiff argued that the
defendant failed to consider, offer or perform bypass
grafting on the patient due to his co-morbidities and an-
atomical considerations which placed him at a high risk
for stent thrombosis. The plaintiff alleged that the result-
ing stent thrombosis caused the plaintiff’s decedent’s
untimely, wrongful death.
The defendant maintained that the plaintiff required
treatment for his presenting issues and that his condition
was such that he was a high-risk patient for both neces-
sary procedures, both of which were performed appro-
priately given the patient’s comorbidities. The defendant
maintained that nothing it did or did not do would have
changed the plaintiff’s decedent’s outcome and that
the care provided gave him the best chance for recov-
ery. The defendant also argued at trial that the individual
treating physicians were negligent and that the defen-
dant was not responsible for the negligence of any
other parties.
The jury found no negligence and returned a verdict in
favor of the defendant.
REFERENCE
Jackson vs. St. Anthony’s Hospital, et al. Case no. 17-
003320-CI; Judge George Jirotka, 01-28-22.
10 SUMMARIES WITH TRIAL ANALYSIS
Volume 32, Issue 3, March 2022 Subscribe Now

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT