How our MD surgeon identified inaccuracies in our defendant’s expert and secured victory for our attorney client?

Trivent Legal processed a medical malpractice case involving a possible surgical negligence by the Surgeon. The Attorney wanted to get a medical chronology of the case events and to address multiple questions for confirming the merit in this case as well as providing appropriate response to the Defendant Expert’s opinion.

A 69-year-old woman with a history of lung cancer underwent chemotherapy and radiation for gastric adenocarcinoma, staged T3N1M0. The defendant surgeon performed a transhiatal esophagectomy, during which significant bleeding, mainly from the left chest, caused hemodynamic instability. Despite a half-hour of resuscitative efforts and the emergency intervention of a Vascular Surgeon, the patient’s condition worsened when an aortic injury was identified , showing a flat aorta with no pulsation. The estimated blood loss was 6500 ml, and she ultimately died despite extensive resuscitation attempts.

What was the MD surgeon’s response to the defendant expert’s opinion?


Our MD Surgeon opined that the decision to perform transhiatal esophagectomy was a deviation from the standard of care in this patient as prior irradiation therapy is one of the contraindications for the procedure due to mediastinal fibrosis. It was also opined that the defendant Surgeon had inadvertently injured the aorta and failed to perform sternotomy earlier to control the bleeding , leading to the death of the patient. Our MD Surgeon  also provided with articles specific to the surgical negligence that demonstrated the complications of transhiatal esophagectomy, and that if the surgeon felts unsafe to proceed with transhiatal esophagectomy, there should be no hesitation for conversion to thoracotomy.

The client had shared the Defendant Expert’s opinion which was a detailed document refuting the accusations of the Plaintiff Expert. Our MD Surgeon reviewed them in detail and pointed out the areas where the Defendant Expert’s responses were wrong. It was highlighted by Our MD Surgeon that the articles mentioned in the Defendant Expert’s report also showed that major vascular injuries happened in patients receiving preoperative chemoradiation. Our MD Surgeon also provided detailed deposition questions to be asked of our defendant’s expert witness. Our attorney-client expressed his utmost satisfaction with the help of Trivent Legal.

If you need your case to be reviewed, please reach out to us at 610-674-6901 or email us at [email protected]

All pages

© 2024 • Trivent Inc • All Rights Reserved. Trivent is not a law firm and does not give a legal opinion.