Medical Malpractice Settlement
August 2002

Our client was hospitalized for abdominal pain. During the course of his hospitalization, a suspicious mass was discovered in his chest and our client feared that it was cancer. The attending physician scheduled various tests to rule out lung cancer, including a bronchoscopy. Unfortunately, the bronchoscopy, in which a tube was introduced into the patient's bronchial tubes, did not reveal the nature of the mass. The doctors decided to perform a biopsy.

A thoracoscopy was scheduled to biopsy lymph nodes in the chest area where the suspicious mass was located. A thoracoscopy is an endoscopic procedure in which puncture wounds are made in the patient's chest wall between the ribs and instruments are introduced into the patient's chest cavity. A light and a camera are introduced into the thoracic cavity so the physician can see the lymph node. Once the lymph node is identified, a cutting instrument is introduced into the chest cavity and the lymph node tissue is removed for examination. Unfortunately, in this case, the surgeon cut an important nerve rather than a lymph node.

When our client awoke in the recovery room, he was unable to lift his right arm. He also felt pain in his arm. After several days, it became clear that the patient's right arm was virtually useless after the procedure. Diagnostic testing after the procedure included MRIs, an EMG and nerve conduction testing. The results of these tests showed that the surgeon had cut the brachial plexus nerve. The brachial plexus nerve gives strength and feeling to the arm and hand. Additional testing by physicians at a regional teaching hospital, where the patient was referred, revealed that there was no surgery or other treatment that could repair the damage done by the surgeon.

Attorneys Lee, Eadon, Isgett and Popwell, P.A. carefully reviewed this patient's medical records to determine whether there was any evidence of medical negligence. It became apparent the brachial plexus nerve should not have been damaged during a procedure within the chest cavity. The brachial plexus nerve bundle lies outside the chest cavity; consequently, there was no reason for the instruments to be in the area of the brachial plexus nerve. This conclusion was confirmed by other physicians consulted by Attorneys Lee, Eadon, Isgett and Popwell, P.A., and ultimately, by the cardiothoracic surgeon hired as an expert witness.

Our expert witness is the Chief of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery at a major teaching hospital/medical center who was Harvard-educated and who had authored numerous articles on thoracic surgery. He quickly concluded that our client's surgeon was guilty of medical negligence and that the medical negligence was the cause of our client's right arm dysfunction.

The surgeon denied that he was at fault. In his deposition, he testified that he identified the tissue he biopsied as lymph node tissue and could not explain how the brachial plexus nerve was cut. He claimed that there must have been some anatomical abnormality. In other words, he claimed that our client's brachial plexus nerve root appeared in the chest cavity. All doctors we contacted said that this was virtually impossible in any human being's anatomy.

In addition to our expert witness, we consulted a radiologist who read an MRI test shortly after the surgery. The radiologist was prepared to testify that there was no anatomical abnormality shown on the MRI test and that the patient's brachial plexus nerve was located outside the thoracic cavity.

We hired a medical illustrator to prepare demonstrative graphics for use at mediation and trial. Working with the medical records and with our witnesses, the medical illustrator was able to prepare detailed drawings showing the nature of the injury and, most importantly, that the injured nerve was outside the chest cavity where the thoracotomy should have occurred.

Our additional witnesses included our client's family members, his doctor, and a neurologist and a neurosurgeon that tested our client after the injury. Additionally, we had planned to call to testify at trial the doctors at the Regional Medical Center who tested and treated our client after the injury. This included the physician who recommended a nerve stimulator.

There was very little treatment recommended to relieve the pain and paralysis caused by the medical negligence. A few years after the injury, it was recommended that a nerve stimulator be implanted in our client's shoulder for pain relief. The neuromuscular stimulator was implanted and did provide some relief. However, our client's right arm remains virtually paralyzed.

Approximately three months before our trial date, we participated in mediation. Mediation is required in the jurisdiction where our case was filed. Our medical illustrations were used to educate the mediator on the facts of our case. The medical illustrations demonstrated the anatomy of the thoracic cavity and the clear fact that the brachial plexus nerve that was cut was outside the chest cavity. Our medical illustrations also showed how the severed nerve gave strength and sensation to the arm and hand. Although some progress was made at the mediation, the case was not settled. Approximately one month later, Attorneys Lee, Eadon, Isgett and Popwell, P.A. made a final demand for settlement. Less than one week before our settlement offer was to expire, the adjuster agreed to pay the amount we had stipulated.

If you, a family member, or a friend has been injured by a doctor or medical professional and you would like additional information about medical malpractice law, contact Attorneys Lee, Eadon, Isgett, and Popwell, P.A. at 803-799-9811 or (toll-free) 1-800-882-0742 or e-mail info@leiplaw.com.