Chicago Medical Malpractice Attorney Blog

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 "Medical Advances Not Always What They're Cracked Up to Be" »

A recent New York Times article reported that a new study indicated that in recent years the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has not rigorously studied or tested many of its approved medical devices before clearing them for sale. The study specifically assessed many medical devices which have been the subject of major recalls over the past few years, such as mechanical ventilators, hospital infusion pumps, and external heart defibrillators.

Diana Zuckerman and Paul Brown, both with The National Research Center for Women and Families, headed up the study along with cardiologist Steven Nissen, M.D. of the Cleveland Clinic. The study, published in The Archives of Internal Medicine, focused on those medical devices that have since been labeled as high risk for recalls between 2005 and 2009. It found that most, if not all, of the medical devices were cleared for public use by the FDA without being first being tested. The FDA and a trade group representing medical device manufacturers called The Archives of Internal Medicine study flawed.

Continue reading "Majority of Recalled Medical Devices Were Untested According to New Study in Archives of Internal Medicine" »

Prior to the 1980s, the risk of transmitting HIV through transplanted organs was fairly high, at a time when even blood transfusions put patients at risk for contracting the deadly virus. However, in 1985, HIV antibody testing became available, which enabled doctors and medical staff to test to see whether organs were infected with HIV. Therefore in today's medical climate it is unlikely that an organ transplant recipient would receive organs infected with HIV.

However, in 2007, four Chicago patients were found to have transmitted HIV by way of their transplanted organs. While the transplant surgeries were done at three different Chicago Hospitals, each of the four patients received organs from the same organ donor. At the time of the transplant surgery the donor was not known to be infected with HIV. His organs passed the standard tests for HIV antibodies; however, those tests could not have detected HIV if the donor acquired the infection within a few weeks of his death.

Critics of the way these 2007 transplant surgeries were handled argue that a nucleic acid test could have detected the HIV infection earlier. However, the nucleic acid test was not approved by the FDA until 2009 and even today is not effective 100 percent of the time; too many false positives make the nucleic acid test unreliable as an universal screening tool.

Continue reading "Chicago Hospitals Alter Organ Transplant Rules After 2007 HIV Infections" »

When analyzing cases for possible Illinois medical malpractice, sometimes the resulting injury is a reasonable outcome of the procedure and as such does not quality as medical malpractice. However, sometimes you encounter a medical malpractice lawsuit where not only was the resulting injury not a foreseeable outcome, but it could have easily been avoided.

Lauro Ortiz's medical malpractice lawsuit is such a case where the resulting injury would not have occurred if not for medical negligence. The kidney transplant malpractice lawsuit resulted in a $6 million settlement from Rush University Medical Center.

Ortiz presented for a kidney transplant at Rush University Medical Center. The 39 year-old had been born with only one kidney and also suffered from diabetes. At the time Ortiz was on dialysis and was hoping that the kidney transplant would free him from the regular dialysis treatments and allow him to live a more normal life.

Continue reading "Illinois Kidney Transplant Case Results in Brain Damage: Chicago Hospital Settles for $6 Million" »