Two Doctors Misread 2 Mammograms And Did Not Detect Woman’s Cancer Until It Became Advanced

Among the key tools available to assist doctors in saving the lives of women is the mammogram, a test that checks for evidence of possible cancer in the breast, letting physicians to diagnose the cancer in its early stages. Yet the mammogram is only as effective as the physician who interprets it. When an error is made in the interpretation of a mammogram it might delay the detection of the patient's cancer. This delay might be sufficient for the cancer to metastasize, decreasing the likelihood that the woman will be able to conserve the breast or survive the cancer.

Consider the documented lawsuit of a woman who went in for a routine mammogram and was told that there was no evidence of cancer. About two years after, she had another mammogram. This time the mammogram was read as displaying no change to the dilated duct from the earlier mammogram. But, the prior mammogram had not evidenced a dilated duct and thus the physicians did nothing to look into the suspicious reverse from the prior, clear, mammogram. Her mammogram was misinterpreted and her cancer was not detected.

When she had a subsequent mammogram done at a different hospital the following year, the doctor who read the mammogram noted a number of small nodular densities. The physician observed that these had not changed from the previous mammograms. Still, neither of the preceding mammograms had contained evidence of any nodular densities. Once again, her mammogram was misread and again her cancer was not detected.

Eventually it was discovered that the patient did have breast cancer, only by the time it was diagnosed it was metastatic cancer having already spread. The main tumor was in the same location where the earlier mammogram had been read as showing a dilated duct. She initiated a lawsuit against both doctors and hospitals. The doctor and hospital that interpreted the third mammogram as indicating small nodular densities settled for an unpublished amount less that the $2,000,000 available in insurance. The doctor and hospital that misread the previous mammogram refused to settle for the full amount of the policy, offering only $125,000. The case proceeded to trial where evidence was offered that had the mammogram not been incorrectly interpreted the cancer could have been discovered while still a Stage 1 cancer, which generally has a 5 year survival rate well above 90%. The law firm that represented the woman reported that the jury came back with a verdict of $12.0 million.

This is a good case to consider for various reasons. To begin, 2 independent mammograms were misread by two distinct doctors at two distinct hospitals. Plus both doctors attributed results to previous mammograms which were actually not present in those earlier mammograms. It is tough to explain how this could have occurred unless the doctors each compared the mammogram they were interpreting to a different patient’s mammogram. Yet the probability of this happening twice at two different hospitals is extremely improbable. Yet the amount of negligence that would be necessary otherwise is genuinely unexcusable. In this case, the jury appears to have agreed.

By: J. Hernandez

Article Directory: http://www.articledashboard.com

Joseph Hernandez is an Attorney accepting medical malpractice cases. You can learn more about metastasized breast cancer and stage 4 breast cancer by visitng the websites