Glasheen, Valles & Inderman represents clients who have been injured by negligent doctors and hospitals, as well as by manufactures of dangerous medical devices. Doctors and hospitals owe a duty of care to their patients, and unfortunately, all too often, that duty is breached when a doctor or other hospital employee severely injures or kills a patient.
Dangerous Medical Devices
Manufacturers of medical devices—be it implanted devices like stints or pacemakers, or tools used during surgery—have a duty to make the devices safe for their intended use. But many times they are in fact not safe to use. Sometimes the manufacturer knows about these dangers ahead of time and conceals them, and other times they do not adequately warn the public about the dangers. In any case, if you or a loved one has been injured by a medical device, call Glasheen, Valles & Inderman today to speak with one of our personal injury attorneys and discuss your case
A morcellator is a surgical instrument used during laparoscopic hysterectomies. The device grinds and minces the tissue that is to be removed, including the uterus, and that tissue is then removed laparoscopically. Hysterecomies involving the use of morcellators have been shown to cause cancer in women because some of the tissue that was morcellated contained a few cancer cells. Once morecellated, those cancer cells are spread throughout the body. The main type of cancer that is caused by this is Leiomyosacoma (LMS).
Originally, the manufacturer published a risk of about 1 in 30,000 of patients developing cancer. In reality, the risk is closer to 1 in 350. That’s about 85 times the risk level that was originally published.
Sales of this medical device to hospitals have already been suspended and the device has been recalled. The FDA has also recommended a black box warning.
If you or someone you know has been diagnosed with LMS cancer after undergoing a hysterectomy, call Glasheen, Valles & Inderman today to discuss your case.
IVC filters are small medical devices inserted into a patient’s artery to catch blood clots before they reach the lungs and cause a pulmonary embolism. IVC filters were not originally intended to be permanently installed, but rather only installed for a short period of time while a patient was at their highest risk of pulmonary embolisms.
Some doctors ignored this and installed them in patients with no plans to ever remove them. Over time, the arms of the IVC filter would fracture, dislodge, and travel through the blood stream, eventually getting buried in some other tissue in the body. Additionally, blood clots can push the IVC filters away from where it was originally installed to somewhere in the blood stream where it is not safe to be.
In May 2014, the FDA announced that IVC filters need to be removed as soon as the patient’s risk of pulmonary embolism is gone. Typically a CAT scan can find an IVC filter, making removal possible.
If you or someone you know has had an IVC filter implanted, you may be entitled to compensation, even if you never experienced and side effects or complications. Call Glasheen, Valles & Inderman today to discuss your case with an attorney.