ONE OF THE commonest routine operations carried out in general surgery departments is the repair of hernias. Around 120,000 people present with hernias in the UK every year, so it is no surprise that a proportionate number of clinical negligence cases are brought.
During the course of last year a number of cases were reported by law firms concerning clinical errors arising in operations to repair hernias.
One of the most harrowing was reported by Swindon clinical negligence specialists S J Edney.
It involved a 77-year-old woman who was receiving treatment in London for the recurrence of left distal ureteric transitional cell cancer. It was agreed that her left kidney and ureter should be removed.
It was also agreed that a large incisional hernia on her left side should be repaired at the same time. The procedure took place in August 2007 and her condition deteriorated following the operation.
A CT on her abdomen the following week identified a “retained foreign body”. It subsequently proved to be a surgical instrument which had been left behind by the surgeon and had to be removed in a second operation at the hospital the same day.
As a consequence of the mistake the original hernia repair was ‘undone’ and the patient was left with a much bigger hernia and an apron of skin, which was very unsightly and caused her a great deal of cosmetic embarrassment. It was unlikely that she would benefit from any further surgery to improve its appearance.
Fortunately, the hospital admitted negligence and a settlement of £35,000 was negotiated.
Pearson Hinchcliffe represented an Oldham man who had surgery to repair a hernia using dissolvable supporting surgical mesh. The use of dissolvable mesh, which is not permanent, resulted in early failure of the operation and persistent pain to the client requiring more surgery. The hospital admitted liability and agreed to pay £45,000 damages.
Darby’s Solicitors also reports a case last year: “Mr H underwent repeat laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair. Following the procedure Mr H suffered from blood in his urine and recurrent urinary infection.
On investigation a staple was identified as having pierced the bladder. The staple was removed and Mr H made a good recovery.
“It was Mr H’s case that the surgeon failed to ensure his bladder was empty before repairing his hernia, and that it was negligent to place the staple into the bladder.
It was Mr H’s case that his injury had resulted in a period of pain and suffering, repeat infections, and requirement for intermittent catheterisation.
“Compensation of £4,000 was agreed following issue and service of court proceedings.”