Bronx County, NY
$2,200,000 VERDICT MEDICAL MALPRACTICE ORTHOPEDIC SURGERY PLAINTIFF CONTENDS DEFENDANT FAILED TO DIAGNOSE AND TREAT KNEE INFECTION SPREAD OF INFECTION, AND FAILURE OF PROSTHETIC JOINT HOSPITALIZATION AND SURGICAL REPAIR OF INFECTED KNEE RESIDUAL SCARRING, PAIN AND SUFFERING, PSYCHOLOGICAL DAMAGE, EMOTIONAL DISTRESS AND MENTAL ANGUISH.
This medical malpractice action involved the defendant orthopedic surgeon and his practice who failed to timely diagnose and treat an infection in the plaintiffs knee which caused a worsening of the plaintiff's condition and necessitated further treatment. The defendant denied negligence and argued that prosthetic joint infection is a known risk of knee surgery where someone has prosthetics implanted. The plaintiff initially presented to the defendant orthopedist as a new patient on September 11, 2015 with a chief complaint of bilateral knee pain. Ten years earlier, he had slipped and fallen when getting on a train, injuring both knees. X-rays showed advanced osteoarthritis in both knees. The defendant recommended bilateral total knee replacements, starting with the left knee. The left total knee replacement was performed on July 11, 2016. In February 2017, he returned to the defendant with a complaint of subluxation when riding his stationary bike and flexing his knee. The defendant recommended a patellofemoral compartment revision with retinacular repair. This procedure was accomplished on May 31, 2017. The plaintiffs allegations of malpractice applied exclusively to the post-operative period, May 31, 2017 through July 11, 2017. During this time, the plaintiff presented to the defendants office for 4 post-operative office visits before deciding to terminate the patient-physician relationship on July 11, 2017. The plaintiff contended that the defendants were negligent in failing to conform to good and accepted standards of orthopedic practice; in deviating and departing from good and accepted standards of orthopedic practice; in failing to take a proper history; in ignoring, failing to appreciate the significance of and act upon the history elicited; in failing to perform a proper orthopedic examination; in ignoring, failing to appreciate the significance of and act upon the findings on orthopedic examination; in failing to perform appropriate radiological studies, including MRI and CT-scans; in ignoring, failing to appreciate the significance of and act upon the radiological studies performed; in failing to perform appropriate laboratory studies; in ignoring, failing to appreciate the significance of and act upon the laboratory studies performed; in ignoring, failing to appreciate the significance of and act upon the complaints made by and signs and symptoms displayed by the patient consistent with infection. The plaintiff contended that the defendant negligently failed to properly treat a local infection and permitted that local infection to become a prosthetic joint infection. The plaintiff contended...
