Senior Trial Partner Michael Sonkin and Partner Anthony Chionchio obtained a unanimous Defense Verdict in Nassau County on behalf of our defendant physician.
The matter involved a 58-yearold female patient who alleged that she sustained a transected left ureter injury during the laparoscopic assisted vaginal hysterectomy (“LAVH”) as a result of incorrect surgical approach and a failure to take adequate intraoperative measures to minimize the risk of injury to the ureters. Additionally, plaintiff claimed a failure to timely diagnose and repair the injury resulting in worsened urinary symptoms including urgency and frequency. plaintiff alleged a lack of informed consent in that she alleged that she was not advised of the risks, alternatives or benefits of the LAVH.
At trial, the defense successfully argued that the performance of the LAVH was clinically indicated given the plaintiff’s report of heavy menstrual bleeding and that LAVH was an appropriate treatment option given the plaintiff’s goal for a shorter postoperative recovery period. Furthermore, the defense argued that the gynecological surgeon took all appropriate intraoperative measures to limit injuries to surrounding structures, including the bladder and ureters, and that the transection injury to the left ureter was an unfortunate, but known and accepted complication of undergoing LAVH. The defense also successfully argued that prophylactic stenting of the ureters and dissecting the ureters was not clinically indicated for this patient and did not constitute the standard of care at the time of the subject treatment. Furthermore, the defense argued that the performance of cystoscopy and/or injection of dye to test the integrity of the ureters at the conclusion of the case was not clinically warranted, as there was no suspicion of injury to the ureters intraoperatively. Finally, the defense was successful in arguing that the ureter injury was timely recognized and repaired in the postoperative period and that the plaintiff’s on-going complaints of urinary frequency and urgency were not due to her ureter injury and repair, but were instead a consequence of her menopause and a side effect of her blood pressure medications.
The jury returned a unanimous defense verdict in less than one hour.