Bladder Cancer

⇐ BACK TO SETTLEMENTS AND VERDICTS INDEX

CASE: Failure to communicate and treat cytology results highly suspicious for neoplasm

FACTS: The defendant was treating the 69-year-old patient/decedent for benign prostate hypertrophy. As part of that treatment the defendant collected a urine sample. The sample was positive for blood. Following up on that finding the defendant ordered a urine cytology. The cytology report was “highly suspicious for neoplasm.” The pathologist noted that the abnormality he observed had a “specificity of 96% for detection of urothelial carcinoma.”   An employee of the defendant practice group scanned the report into the patient/decedent’s chart, but failed to put it into the defendant’s queue for review. The defendant subsequently reviewed the patient’s chart, and saw the patient three times over the next six months for recurrent complaints of hematuria, but did not learn of the positive cytology results until after performing a flexible cystoscopy which revealed multiple tumors in his bladder. The patient died five months later.

DEFENSES: Defendants claimed lack of causation. They took the position that even had the patient decedent received the cytology report at or near the time it was received and been diagnosed and treated appropriately, he would not have lived longer because he had a particularly aggressive bladder cancer.

INJURIES: Premature death. Loss of consortium.

SPECIAL DAMAGES: Medical bills: $44,600.32; Funeral expenses: $4,626.00

SETTLEMENT: The parties agreed to settle for a confidential amount.

PLAINTIFF’S COUNSEL: Randolph J. Reis and Kimberly Kirkland (Reis & Kirkland, PLLC)

NAMES/COUNTY: Anonymous v. Anonymous