Man awarded €450,000 for mistaken stomach removal

A man is to receive €450,000 damages after his stomach was removed as a result of an incorrect diagnosis of stomach cancer, arising…

A man is to receive €450,000 damages after his stomach was removed as a result of an incorrect diagnosis of stomach cancer, arising from a mix-up between his tissue sample and that of a 70-year-old cancer patient.

The issue of who is liable for the damages to be paid to Alan O'Gorman (26), arising from the operation at St Vincent's hospital in Dublin four years ago, has yet to be decided.

Mr O'Gorman has brought proceedings against the hospital and six other defendants - a pathology registrar, three technicians and two doctors - all of whom deny liability for what happened to him.

When counsel for St Vincent's, Eoghan Fitzsimons SC, told Mr Justice Vivian Lavan yesterday that the hospital was not conceding liability, the judge said that was "an outrageous approach".

READ MORE

The case opened last week but, on its third day yesterday, Mark de Blacam SC, for Mr O'Gorman, told Mr Justice Lavan that his client had accepted the sum of €450,000 damages. The action then proceeded to determine liability.

Mr O'Gorman, The Close, Fox Lodge Woods, Ratoath, Co Meath, alleged negligence in his treatment by St Vincent's hospital and six other defendants.

The six defendants are Ritu Guai Kapur, a pathology registrar; three hospital technicians - Robert Geraghty, Bernie Curran and John Harford; Daniel K Sheahan, a consultant histo-pathologist; and Justin Geoghegan, a consultant surgeon at the hospital.

Yesterday's agreement on the amount of damages came after Mr Justice Lavan told the parties that "an air of reality" should be introduced into the courtroom.

The judge said Mr O'Gorman had been "waiting 4½ years" and that the court proceedings were estimated to take two weeks, even though the facts had been admitted.

Mr Fitzsimons said the hospital was not admitting liability. The fact there was a mix-up was not denied but the hospital denied negligence or breach of duty, he said. Mr Justice Lavan said: "That is an outrageous approach." He added he wanted his comment on the record of the court.

Patrick Hanratty SC, for Mr Sheahan and Mr Geoghegan, said his clients were appalled at the state of affairs that existed.

The two consultants believed a serious injury had been done to Mr O'Gorman and steps should have been taken to compensate him in full.

They denied any liability. The Medical Council had exonerated both of them but the hospital was trying to blame them, Mr Hanratty said.

In evidence, Fergus Clancy, whose firm Healthcare Risk Consulting Ireland carried out an investigation into the incident some three weeks after the mix-up of samples occurred, said its report looked at working practices and conditions in the pathology laboratory.

The report had concluded blame in this case could not be attributed to any one person, but also stated the mix-up of samples was a mistake that should never have happened.

Mr Clancy agreed with Mr Hanratty that the potential risk from a mix-up of any tissue samples was obvious.

The court heard how Mr O'Gorman collapsed at work on February 14th, 2002, and was brought by ambulance to St Vincent's.

The next day, he was brought to theatre where his appendix was removed.

An area of inflammation was noted on his stomach, suggestive of a perforated gastric ulcer and a tissue sample was taken and sent for analysis.

It is claimed Mr O'Gorman's tissue sample was mixed up with that of another patient, a 70-year-old man who was suffering from cancer.

After analysis of that sample, a diagnosis of cancer was made in Mr O'Gorman's case.

Mr O'Gorman's stomach was removed on March 19th, 2002, as a result. After the removed stomach was analysed and found to have no evidence of gastric cancer, the mix-up in tissue samples was discovered, the court heard.