Justia Lawyer Rating for Robert D. Kreisman

by

Over the years, medical advances have led to countless innovative inventions that have saved many lives. However, not every medical innovation lives up to its expectations. The recall of DuPuy’s metal-on-metal hip joint is a perfect example of a medical device that failed to delivery as promised.

The first artificial hip joint was developed in the 1960s and was made of a metal ball placed in a plastic cup, which were meant to replicate the thigh bone and hip socket, respectively. Then, metal-on-metal hip implant devices were developed in response to studies showing that metal and plastic hip devices were leading to bone loss in some patients.

The medical community believed the medical device changes made to metal-on-metal hip implants would revolutionize the future of artificial hips. Not only would the newer design lead to less bone loss in patients, but by replacing plastic with metal, the belief was that the new medical device would last longer than the original metal and plastic version. Medical professionals viewed metal-on-metal hip devices as the final solution to hip implant patients’ problems.

Continue reading

by

A Cook County wrongful death lawsuit involving the death of a 45 year-old woman was settled by the decedent’s estate for $1.35 million. The Illinois lawsuit dealt with claims of medical negligence on behalf of the defendant surgeon and the hospital where he as employed. Jerry Markbreit for the Estate of Betsy Markbreit v. Jose Velasco, M.D., et al., 07 L 8703.

The Illinois surgical malpractice began in 2004, when Ms. Markbreit was admitted to Rush North Shore Medical Center to have a benign growth on her thyroid gland. Prior testing had indicated that the benign growth was limited to the right side of Ms. Markbriet’s thyroid gland, a finding that was confirmed on the surgical report. Yet the surgeon, Dr. Jose Velasco, elected to perform a total thyroidectomy on the decedent.

The Cook County medical malpractice claim was critical of the surgeon’s decision to perform a total thyroidectomy. Ms. Markbreit had only been scheduled for a partial thyroidectomy and given the fact that her benign growth was isolated to one side of her thyroid gland there was no medical reason to perform a total thyroidectomy. This lack of medical necessity was significant because the plaintiff’s wrongful death lawsuit traced all of Ms. Markbreit’s subsequent medical problems and eventual death back to the unnecessary total thyroidectomy.

Continue reading

by

Johnson & Johnson has announced that it will be dropping one of its medical devices from production – by the end of 2011, the company will cease manufacturing its drug-coated heart stents. The company explains its decision was due its decreasing market share in the heart stent category; Johnson & Johnson is looking to funnel the newly freed funds into developing other medical products.

Johnson & Johnson’s drug-coated heart stents were manufactured in conjunction with Cordis, its subsidiary. Cordis’s Cypher stent was the first drug-coated heart stent approved by the FDA. However, by the end of this year, it will no longer be manufactured. Likewise, Cordis will halt its research and development of a new stent, the Nevo stent.

The sale of drug-coated heart stents represents a $4 billion market, which previously had been divided between Johnson & Johnson/Cordis, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and Abbott Laboratories. However, Cordis’s portion of that market has been decreasing. In 2006, Cordis made $2.6 billion globally from the sale of drug-coated stents, whereas last year it only made $627 million.

Continue reading

by

The Illinois Supreme Court ruled as to the statute of limitations regarding the Illinois lawsuit of Kristen Kaufmann v. Roger A. Schroeder, M.D., Jersey Community Hospital, a municipal corporation, et al., No. 109738. While the plaintiff argued that she had filed her claim well within the two year statute, the Illinois Supreme Court held that she had failed to meet the actual one year statute of limitations. The deciding factor of whether or not it was a one or two year statute dealt with whether or not Kaufmann’s claim was considered an Illinois medical malpractice lawsuit.

The facts surrounding Kaufmann involved allegations that the plaintiff woke up after being sedated to find her physician licking her breasts. The complaint also contended that not only had her OB-GYN, Dr. Roger Schroeder, committed sexual assault against Kaufmann, but that he had unnecessarily sedated her in order to do so.

Kaufmann had presented to Jersey Community Hospital under Dr. Schroeder’s care for treatment of an urinary tract infection and was told that she needed to be sedated for the procedure; she later discovered that this was not true. As a result of Dr. Schroeder’s actions, Kaufmann filed a complaint not only against the doctor, but also against Jersey Community Hospital, the hospital employing him.

Continue reading

by

Medicine is a healing profession; as patients we look to our physicians to cure our ailments and relieve our pain. However, in order to heal us, doctors must first diagnose the problem – a quick and speedy diagnosis is often the key to a successful recovery. Likewise, when there is an unnecessary delay in diagnosis, oftentimes the outcome is not very favorable for the patient.

Take for instance the case of 76 year-old Shirley Cyborski, who died as a result of the failure to diagnose her colon cancer for over a year. The medical lawsuit resulting out of this misdiagnosis of cancer, Estate of Shirley Cyborski v. Advocate Health and Hospitals Corp., et al, No. 08 L 6447, was recently settled for $2.05 million.

In 2006, Shirley presented to Advocate South Suburban Hospital for a barium enema examination. This exam is typically performed when a patient experiences a change in bowel habits, has abdominal pain or rectal bleeding, or if there is a suspicion that the patient has diverticulitis or polyps. An x-ray of Shirley’s colon was taken at the time of the barium enema exam, which showed a mass in her colon. However, the colon mass was not reported and therefore her cancer went undiagnosed.

Continue reading

by

France’s Agence Francaise De Securite Sanitaire Des Produits De Sante (AFSSAPS) banned the use of Actors, a drug prescribed to control diabetes, due to concerns that it increases the risk of bladder cancer amongst patients taking the drug. Actors manufactured by Japan’s Takeda Pharmaceutical and is one of the pharmaceutical company’s top-selling drugs. The French medical board’s decision has caused Germany to follow suit in banning the diabetes drug, with reports that the UK might soon follow.

The French drug suspension not only affects Actos, but also applies to Competact, a similar prescription drug that combines Actos with metformin. Both drugs were suspended because they contained the active ingredient Pioglitazone, which has been linked to the increase risk of bladder cancer. This risk was documented in a study of antidiabetic patients taking antidiabetic medicines that was conducted by the Caisse National d’Assurance Maladie between 2006 and 2009.

The sale of Actos was approved in Europe in 2000, with Competact being approved in 2006. Since that time, an estimated 230,000 patients use Actos in France alone. In 2010, Europe accounted for Y29.5 billion, or about 7.5%, of Actos Y387.9 billion in global sales. The banning of Actos in Europe could drastically affect the fate of the Japan-based pharmaceutical company and exposes it to potential pharmaceutical liability lawsuits.

Continue reading

by

When undergoing a major surgery, as patients we tend to focus on the risks associated with the surgery itself: will the doctor cut something he shouldn’t, will I have a bad reaction to anesthesia, or will my body reject the new heart. However, in some instances the period following the surgery can be just as risky as the surgery itself.

Take for example The Estate of Shamiran David v. Rush North Shore Medical Center, et al., 07 L 8444, an Illinois wrongful death lawsuit involving the death of fifty-nine year-old Shamiran David. Mrs. David presented to Rush North Shore Medical Center in July 2005 for an aortic valve replacement and coronary artery bypass surgery. While the complex surgery went well, Mrs. David’s post-operative care was mismanaged, leading to her death less than six months later.

Following her heart surgery, Mrs. David was placed on Coumadin therapy, which is the common procedure following a mechanical aortic valve replacement. Coumadin is a drug that works to decrease your blood’s clotting ability in order to prevent blood clots from forming. However, it is important for patients taking Coumadin to be on the right dosage. If too much Coumadin is given, a patient is at increased risk for bleeding; however, if too little is given, then the patient is at risk for getting blood clots.

Continue reading

by

Second chances are rare in medicine. Oftentimes doctors and nurses have one chance to get something right, which means that medical providers need to monitor patients’ reactions to different treatment modalities. When they see something that is not right, medical providers need to pick up on the warning signs and correct the problem because chances are they will only get one chance to do so.

However, in the case of Kerry Rupright, doctors missed their chance to prevent Kerry’s permanent brain injury from happening. They missed the signs that should have alerted them that she was not reacting well to her various medications, instead opting to continue her treatment plan. The medical malpractice lawsuit of Estate of Kerry Rupright v. Rehabilitation Institute of Chicago, et al., 05 L 9451, was filed in an effort to hold these doctors accountable for their lack of vigilance in monitoring Kerry’s condition.

Kerry presented to Rehabilitation Institute of Chicago for treatment of her transverse myelitis, which is inflammation across one section of the spinal cord. Transverse myelitis is extremely painful, so Kerry was prescribed pain medications as part of her treatment plan. Specifically, Kerry was given a pain relief patch that contained Duragesic and Fentanyl, which can cause respiratory distress when taken with other medications.

Continue reading

by

Illinois hospitals are required to have an internal review board that conducts investigations that focus on the quality of patient care. These investigations can be triggered by catastrophic outcomes, unexpected deaths, and also by the suggestion of another hospital employee. The purpose of these investigations is to improve the quality of patient care by identifying any potential abuse or medical negligence and then coming up with ways to prevent similar outcomes in the future.

The Illinois Department of Public Health has recently amended its regulations regarding various components of patient abuse and neglect in order to increase patient safety in hospitals. These new regulations fall under the amendments made to 77 Ill. Adm. Code 250 et seq. and have already gone into effect in Illinois.

One of the most valuable tools for identify patient abuse is hospital employees themselves. Hospital employees are aware of what the appropriate standards are for patient care and are in an unique position to identify when abuse does occur. Therefore, many of the new regulations are meant to clarify the process of reporting patient abuse and neglect and putting protections in place for the “whistleblower” employees.

Continue reading

by

Any time a patient undergoes a surgical procedure, doctors warn us of the various risks and complications that could result from the surgery. Yet what duty do physicians have to be prepared to handle the potential complications of a surgical procedure? Are they excused from medical negligence if a patient dies as a result of a known complication of surgery? Or do they have a duty to do everything in their power to try and beat the odds and save the patient?

Take for instance the facts surrounding the Illinois wrongful death lawsuit of Estate of Abraham Pinarkyil v. Resurrection Medical Center, et al., No. 07010009. The case involves the death of a 45 year-old man who died after undergoing surgery to remove a benign tumor in his heart. Even though the man’s tumor was benign, the surgery was necessary because even benign tumors can be life threatening by impairing heart function and blood flow.

The heart tumor was removed at Resurrection Medical Center and immediately following the surgery there were signs of problems. Instead of having improved cardiac function following the removal of his benign tumor, Mr. Pinarkyil began to experience cardiac abnormalities. These abnormal heart symptoms should have alerted the medical staff that he was possibly going into shock.

Continue reading