Surgical error can occur in a range of medical settings and may include:

• Performing surgery on the incorrect part of the body or patient

• Unnecessary damage caused during surgery

• Lack of care

• Failure to effectively control blood loss

• Leaving foreign objects inside the body

• Nerve damage

• Perforation of organs

• Poorly administered anaesthesia

• Infection

• Failure to follow recommended practice

• Operating when it is not safe to do so – e.g. when the surgeon is tired, or under the influence of alcohol or drugs

• Incorrect medication (type or dose)

It is important to distinguish between adverse outcomes or events during surgery due to negligence, and those that may occur due to the nature and complexity of the operation.  As such, not every surgery during which there is a problem will be classified as negligence.

If you are unsure whether your case, or that of a family member or loved one, constitutes negligence by a surgeon, please contact one of our specialist surgery negligence solicitors today.  We will take the time to listen to the details of your concerns in a respectful and caring manner and provide an open and honest assessment of whether you might be able to bring a claim for recourse.

Medical negligence may occur for a number of possible reasons including insufficient staff, tiredness due to excess hours, insufficient skills and/or experience, insufficient supervision, lack of correct tools or equipment, ineffective communication, poor procedures (e.g. poor sterilising processes leading to infection), or lack of planning.

To bring a claim for surgical negligence, it will be necessary to provide evidence that:

• The surgeon, anaesthetist, or other healthcare professional involved in your care performed their duty in a way that was below a satisfactory standard (i.e. that another surgeon or healthcare professional would not have made the same error), and;

• This negligence caused you damage or injury.

To prove your case, we will compile evidence, including medical or care records, and seek expert medical opinion

Claims following surgical negligence may cover two areas of loss:

• Pain and suffering due to the injury; and

• Specific costs resulting from the injury caused. This may cover costs already incurred, such as transport, accommodation, and medical treatment, and expected future expenses, such as physical therapy and care costs.

The costs you receive will be based on the precise injuries suffered and the circumstances of the case.

Case Overview:

Our client presented to the emergency department at a hospital complaining of a progressively worsening headache which had been ongoing for in excess of a week.

CT brain imaging was performed which was reported as normal. He was then discharged from the emergency department.

He represented again to the emergency department with persistent symptoms of headaches and left leg weakness.  Upon clinical examination, left lower limb weakness, mild ataxia with difficulty performing left heel to shin test, and a left visual defect were noted. He was admitted to hospital for further investigation where he underwent repeat CT brain and CT angiogram of the neck vessels, both of which were unremarkable.

He underwent a lumbar puncture which was recorded in his clinical notes as traumatic, with blood visible in the sample obtained.  The procedure was not adequately documented and, in particular, the position of our client when the lumber puncture was being performed, the type and size of the needle used, the spinal segment level at which the cerebrospinal fluid (“CSF”) tap was attempted, and the number of insertions or passes made in order to obtain CSF were not recorded.

In the aftermath of the lumbar puncture, he complained of left leg weakness with an inability to perform heel-toe testing. His condition deteriorated further. In view of his presentation, MRI imaging of the spine was undertaken, to investigate the neurological deficits of which he complained. Subsequent review of the MRI confirmed evidence of substantial spinal haemorrhage with intramedullary signal abnormality.

Unfortunately, owing to the manner in which a lumbar puncture procedure was performed he suffered significant neurological injury with ongoing lower limb paresis and bladder and bowel dysfunction.

This case was fully defended and was mediated a week in advance of the trial date.  This case ultimately settled for a significant sum.

Case Overview:

In September 2020, the plaintiff underwent a laparoscopic (keyhole) operation for removal of the adrenal gland.

During the operation the plaintiff lost a large amount of blood, described as a life-threatening haemorrhage, that led to conversion to an open operation. Instead of having the adrenal gland removed, the plaintiff had a large part of the pancreas removed.

Subsequently the patient required a transfer to another hospital, under the care of another surgeon who undertook an open bilateral adrenalectomy and repair of the injured pancreas.

The plaintiff instructed Lavelle Partners to investigate the circumstances of the case and we obtained expert evidence from a consultant surgeon in the UK. Our expert believed the operation was performed in such a way that it led to a failure to remove the organ. He further opined that having half of the plaintiff’s pancreas removed instead of the adrenal gland cannot be accepted as a possible or reasonable risk associated with the planned operation and so the surgeon was deemed to have been negligent.

Proceedings were issued on behalf of the plaintiff and the case was successfully settled for a significant sum plus the plaintiff’s costs in advance of the trial date.