Skip to content .

Child holding an adult's hand

General surgery cases

  • C v Barts & the London HNS Trust

  • F v Waters
  • M v Barts & The London NHS Trust (2001) - 4 year old boy - delay in diagnosing appendicitis –appendix perforated – two further procedures – ongoing intermittent abdominal pain – settlement £7,500

M v Barts & The London NHS Trust (2001)

On 18 February 1996, M, a four year-old boy, was taken by his mother, E, to the Minor Injuries Unit at St. Bartholomew’s Hospital. The history given was of vomiting, abdominal pain, fever and sore throat for 3 days. He was transferred to the Royal London Hospital. An abdominal x-ray confirmed distension of the bowel. Preliminary diagnoses of urinary tract infection and gastroenteritis were made and M was transferred to the paediatric department. M was seen by a general surgeon, who noted that he had not opened his bowels for four days. It was concluded there was a blockage in the colon and a secondary urinary tract infection and IV antibiotics were commenced later that night. M was discharged on 19 February.

On 23 February 1996, M was examined by his GP, who confirmed pyrexia and found M’s abdomen to be tender, with guarding. M’s GP referred him back to the Royal London Hospital.

M was seen at the accident and emergency department at the Royal London Hospital on that day. Appendicitis was excluded. Later, M was transferred to the Queen Elizabeth Hospital, where appendicitis was immediately diagnosed. An operation was performed that night and M was found to have a perforated appendix.

M’s post operative recovery was complicated by a wound infection, which required further surgery to drain pus from his wound. He was allowed home on 14 March 1996 and was readmitted on 17 March 1996 when he had secondary suture of his abdominal wound. M had intermittent abdominal pain for several months following these procedures.

Expert paediatric surgery evidence indicated that a diagnosis of appendicitis should have been made on 18 February 1996 (i.e. the first admission). There was also a delay in diagnosing appendicitis when M re-presented on 23 February. Had the diagnosis of appendicitis been made on 18 February, M would have avoided the peritonitis that was present by the time of his operation on 23 February. Additional surgical procedures would have been avoided and M could have resumed normal activities within 6 weeks.

The defendant initially denied liability. The claim was settled on 20 September 2001 in the sum of £7,500.

You can find out more information about how to make a clinical negligence claim and how we can assist you on our clinical negligence pages.

V v St Georges Healthcare NHS Trust

V suffered from abdominal pain, bloating and diarrhoea. She was diagnosed as suffering from gallstones and was advised to have an operation to have them removed, which took place on 10 June 2003. During its performance, the surgeon noted a perforation in the accessory bile duct which he decided to drain and reassess the following day.

Following the operation, V’s health rapidly deteriorated and she was transferred to ICU. An emergency laparotomy was performed the next day, following which she developed acute respiratory distress syndrome, biliury peritonitis, recurrent pneumothoraces, recurrent chest pain, foot drop secondary to critical care neuropathy and atrial fibrillation. V remained in ICU for many days and was discharged from hospital on 3 November 2003.

In May 2006, V instructed Mark Bowman with the benefit of LSC funding, to pursue a claim. Our expert surgeon confirmed that during the operation of 10 June 2003, the surgeon should have converted immediately to a laparotomy so that the accessory duct could have been ligated, preventing the biliary leak and numerous post operative and long term problems.

Proceedings were served on the Defendant on 24 May 2007. The Trust denied liability.

Further evidence was obtained on behalf of V from experts in care, neurology, psychiatry and respiratory diseases.

A third offer of £200,000 was accepted by V. The offer was felt to be an excellent settlement due to the fact that liability remained in dispute and there was debate as to V’s life expectancy.

V received the full sum of £200,000 and all her legal fees. Afterwards she said:

“I am very happy and grateful for your help over the past few years.  I could not have got where I am today without you.  Whereas at one stage I had wished to accept the Defendant’s first offer, thanks to your careful guidance, I now appreciate that I would have made a grave mistake to settle for such a sum.  Thank you.”

 

No two surgical procedures are the same. Our clinical negligence lawyers have experience in dealing with all types of surgical claims, ranging from cosmetic surgery claims to keyhole surgery claims, from delays in diagnosing conditions to failure to gain necessary consent for surgery. Regardless of whether your treatment was provided for under the NHS or paid for privately we can provide assistance.

We will do everything we can to enable you to concentrate on your recovery whilst we handle the legal process. We will work with medical experts to ensure that the fullest possible investigation into your claim is provided.

We will conduct our initial consultation completely free of charge and, where you are unable to travel, will travel to see you wherever you may be in the UK. Following the initial consultation we will be in a position to advise how best to proceed. 

What we will do:

  • investigate your case by obtaining the medical records and the best independent expert advice
  • visit you, in your home/hospital to give you and your family advice and guidance
  • obtain interim payments where necessary to pay for a care regime
  • ensure that your case is handled expertly throughout and only by qualified lawyers who have the requisite expertise and understanding to deal with a general surgery claim