Skip to content .

Keyhole Surgery cases

A v Lewisham Hospital NHS Trust (2003) - Failure to identify and properly occlude the cystic artery during laparoscopic cholecystectomy - emergency laparotomy - severe abdominal pain - manual evacuation of bowels - on-going abdominal pain - IBS - settlement £24,000

M v Guys & St. Thomas’ Hospitals NHS Trust (1999) - Diathermy damage to hepatic duct during laser to gallbladder – occlusion of bile duct – hepatico-jejunostomy and Roux-en-Y-procedure – ongoing abdominal pain – settlement £38,000

M v Lightwood (1997) - Diathermy damage to common hepatic duct during laparoscopic cholecystectomy – bile leak - a number of repair procedures – depressed – personality change – settlement £120,198

 

Full case details

A v Lewisham Hospital NHS Trust (2003)

A suffered from gallstones. On 6 July, A underwent a laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The operation appeared to proceed without complication. Following the procedure, A suffered from abdominal pain. Her haemoglobin levels fell and an ultrasound scan carried out the next day confirmed that she was bleeding internally. An emergency laparotomy was performed, where it was discovered that the cystic artery was only partly clipped by the clip occluding the cystic duct. During the operation, the artery was freed and tied, the operation note being titled “bleeding cystic artery”.

Following the laparotomy, A continued to suffer severe abdominal pain requiring substantial pain relief and also developed severe constipation as a result of the high level of pain killing drugs needed. This led to a further operation under general anaesthetic for manual evacuation of A’s bowels.

As a result of the laparotomy, A continues to suffer from on-going abdominal pain and the scar is particularly sensitive. She also suffers from Irritable Bowel Syndrome (IBS) and became clinically depressed. We alleged that the failure to clip the cystic artery was negligent and that if the artery had been properly occluded at the laparoscopy, A would not have undergone the laparotomy, nor suffered the on-going abdominal pain or sensitivity in her scar. Causation in relation to the IBS was more difficult as there were entries in A’s medical records suggesting that she had suffered abdominal symptoms in the past, although no diagnosis of IBS had been communicated to her. It is accepted that IBS is affected by “life events” and therefore, we argued that had A’s treatment proceeded as originally planned, she would not have suffered as severely.

The claim was issued in July 2002. The trial was listed for December 2003. Following the experts meeting, Janine Collier negotiated a settlement in the sum of £24,000, plus costs.

 

M v Guys & St. Thomas’ Hospitals NHS Trust (1999)

M had her gallbladder removed by laser at Guy’s Hospital. Following surgery, she developed jaundice and investigations confirmed grossly abnormal liver function tests and ERCP examinations demonstrated occlusion of the bile duct. She underwent a laparotomy which identified that the hepatic ducts were severely injured, most likely by diathermy. M underwent further surgery in the form of a hepatico-jejunostomy and Roux-en-Y procedure. He remained in hospital for over two months. M made a good recovery, but continued to experience abdominal pain, due to adhesions.

The claim was settled in the sum of £38,000, plus costs.

 

M v Lightwood (1997)

M underwent a laparoscopic cholecystectomy at the Gatwick Park Hospital. Shortly after discharge, M developed severe upper abdominal pain and was re-admitted to hospital. Following investigations, burn damage to the common hepatic duct was identified, which had resulted in a bile leak. M underwent a number of repair procedures, necessitating long periods of in-hospital care. She became depressed and experienced a change in personality.

A settlement was agreed in the sum of £120,198, plus costs.

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.