A Maryland medical malpractice suit filed by the parents of a teenager alleges that multiple instances of medical negligence on the part of several parties resulted in serious damage to their son’s heart, which has already been transplanted once and will need to be transplanted again in the future, as a result of said negligence. Altogether, the lawsuit alleges medical neligence on the part of three physicians, a radiologist, and a radiology lab. Learn more about the series of events that led to the lawsuit in our blog.
Maryland Medical Malpractice Suit: Multiple Instances of Negligence
The trials of the now 16-year-old teenager began on August 13, 2013, when he was allegedly misdiagnosed by a radiologist as having walking pneumonia, which is less severe than bacterial or viral pneumonia. However, the teenager was actually in the process of heart failure caused by cardiomyopathy, which is an acquired or hereditary disease of the heart muscle.
Four days later, this heart failure was correctly diagnosed by an ER physician. However, the lawsuit alleges that the physician was negligent in failure to stop fluids from being administered to the boy, causing his condition to worsen.
The next day, he was airlifted to another hospital in Baltimore. A physician there allegedly incorrectly diagnosed him with septic shock. As a result of this diagnosis, he received the wrong medical treatment, and continued to receive fluids. His fluids were restricted and he was administered diuretics 11 hours later, but continued to receive the wrong treatment.
"Despite an improvement in the teenager’s condition, the allegedly incorrect medical treatment resulted in irreversible heart damage due to the administration of fluids that was inappropriate," according to medicalmalpracticelawyers.com. As a result, the teenager needed a heart transplant, which was performed 4 months after the first alleged misdiagnosis.
In their lawsuit, the plaintiffs allege that the misdiagnoses were negligent, and that the standard of care held that fluids should not have been administered unless the possibility of heart failure had been ruled out.