Gorovitz & Borten, P.C.
Attorneys at Law

550 Cochituate Road, SUite 25
Framingham, Massachusetts
Tel: (781) 890-9095
Ureteral Injury - Hysterectomy
The plaintiff was referred by her primary care physician to the
defendants for assessment of a pelvic mass consistent with a
uterine fibroid. Following evaluation, the defendant physicians
recommended a total abdominal hysterectomy for removal or the
uterine fibroids.

On July 12, 2002, the defendants performed a total abdominal
hysterectomy. Immediately following the operation, the plaintiff
complained of severe pain and was assessed with draining
blood-tinged urine and decreased urinary output. Despite ongoing
complications, the plaintiff was discharged by the defendants from
the hospital on July 15, 2002.
On July 17, 2002 the plaintiff was re-admitted with left-sided
abdominal pain radiating into her back and left flank, accompanied
by nausea and vomiting. A CT was taken, and an exploratory
surgery was initiated which found the ureter had been completely
transected. A subsequent surgeon preformed a ureter
reimplantation into the bladder, after freeing up the affected portion
of the ureter and the plaintiff was discharged on July 23, 2002.  

The plaintiff suffered continuing complications, requiring three
further hospital admissions with surgical intervention. The third
hospital admission revealed the plaintiff was suffering from
Clostridium Difficile, and she was treated intravenously with Flagyl.

The plaintiff's expert was prepared to testify that injury to the ureter
at the time of an abdominal hysterectomy can be almost completely
avoided by the simple preliminary measure of routine identification
of the ureter above the level of disease. Further, the plaintiff's
expert was prepared to testify that the standard of care would be
met if there was adequate exposure of the surgical field,
appropriate dissection of the retroperitoneal spaces and clamping
and suturing under direct vision. Finally, the plaintiff's expert was
prepared to testify that failure to continuously visually identify the
ureter during the abdominal hysterectomy, and retract the ureter
from the operative field, was a clear deviation from the acceptable
standard of care.

That opinion was supported by the defendants' operative note
which indicated they had encountered unusual difficulty in
visualizing the pelvis due to the enlargement of the uterus. The
plaintiff's expert also opined that the failure to diagnose the injury to
the left ureter before closing the abdominal cavity deprived the
plaintiff of the opportunity to have the ureteral injury repaired while
still under anesthesia before leaving the operating room.  

With the intervention of a case manager, the case settled during
discovery prior to the Defendants-Physicians depositions in the
amount of $250,000.

Contact Information
If you, your child or a member of your family have been injured as a
result of an injury to the ureter during a surgical operation,
postoperative complication, substandard postoperative care,
deficient medical treatment or failure to be properly treated, please
Dr. Borten and our Boston area medical malpractice attorneys at
Gorovitz & Borten evaluate your case.
For a free confidential consultation and receive a response within 24
hours (when possible), please contact us by phone, fax or e-mail
with your question or concern.

Telephone:  781-890-9095     -     Fax:   781-890-9098
Electronic mail:
Questions or Inquiries to:

Website disclaimer: The materials on this website have been prepared
by Gorovitz & Borten, P.C. for informational purposes only and are not intended,
and should not be construed as legal advice. This information is not intended
to create and receipt of it does not constitute a lawyer-client relationship.
Similarly, any submission or receipt of information using electronic "Contact
Us" form does not create a lawyer-client relationship. Internet and online
readers should not act upon any of the information contained on this website
without seeking professional counsel. (
See Terms and Conditions).