 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Bielke v. Fairview-University Medical Ceneter9/30/2003
Appellant Darcy Bielke challenges the district court's dismissal of her medical-malpractice claim. Appellant argues that the district court abused its discretion by denying her motion for an extension of time to serve respondent with affidavits of expert identification and by granting respondent's motion to dismiss based on appellant's failure to establish a prima facie case. Because we conclude that the district court abused its discretion, we reverse and remand.
FACTS
Appellant Darcy Bielke was admitted to Fairview-University Hospital for low back surgery on November 3, 1999. The surgical procedure involved a transabdominal lumbar fusion with a free fibula graft from her left leg. Timothy Garvey, M.D., performed the primary surgical procedure and second-year resident, Anthony Sestero, M.D., assisted him. The surgery concluded at about 10:00 p.m. Drs. Garvey and Sestero assessed appellant's medical condition following surgery and concluded that her condition was then satisfactory. Dr.áGarvey testified that because there was a risk of vascular complications, it was essential to ensure that appellant had an adequate vascular supply to her left leg.
As the resident under Dr. Garvey, Dr. Sestero was left in charge of appellant's post-operative care. Dr. Garvey asked Dr. Sestero to communicate to the nurses to check appellant's vital signs and to conduct a neurovascular assessment of her left leg twice an hour for the first six hours and once an hour for the following six hours. If the nurses had any questions or concerns, they were to contact Dr. Sestero. Dr. Sestero left the hospital at approximately 10:30 p.m.
At about 1:00 a.m., the charge nurse called Dr. Sestero to report that appellant was experiencing a level of pain that appellant rated a 10 out of 10. Dr. Sestero ordered additional pain medication. At about 3:00 a.m., the on-duty nurse became concerned because she could not find a pedal pulse in appellant's left foot. Appellant's foot was becoming progressively cooler and more numb; appellant was unable to move her toes and was still experiencing the same high level of pain. The charge nurse called Dr.áSestero again and reported appellant's deteriorating condition. Dr. Sestero instructed the nursing staff to check for compartment syndrome by checking appellant's calf for tenderness and wiggling her toe. Upon examination, appellant was able to move her toe a small amount and her calf seemed normal. But she continued to complain of significant pain and her toes were numb. In addition, the nurse was unable to find a pedal pulse.
Dr. Sestero ordered the nursing staff to continue to watch appellant's left leg and keep the bandage loosened. When the nurse asked Dr.áSestero if he would like to come in to assess the leg for himself, he responded that it could wait until morning.
At about 6:00 a.m., Dr. Sestero returned to the hospital and conducted an examination of appellant. At that time, appellant had no detectable pulse in her left foot or lower leg, no sensation below the ankle, no toe movement, loss of temperature in the lower leg, and pain in her foot and ankle. While Dr. Sestero was assessing appellant, the chief resident, T.J. Panek, M.D., arrived and also examined appellant's leg. They concluded that the condition of appellant's left leg had deteriorated and they had concerns about vascular abnormality. Drs. Panek and Sestero then contacted Matthew Putnam, M.D., who had harvested the fibula from appellant's left leg for surgery the preceding day, and gave him their assessment. Dr.áPutnam ordered that appellant be immediately sent to surgery.
Surgery revealed an occlusion of the left common iliac artery, whic
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Minnesota Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|