|
|
|
|
| Disposition:
(Settlement/Arbitration/Trial) |
Settlement |
Date: |
2/13/2006 |
Type of Case: |
Medical Malpractice |
Allegation(s): |
Elevated PSA, failure to refer to urologist, prostate cancer |
Result: |
$550,00 as to both plaintiffs |
Case Name: |
Wasko v. John D. Hill, M.D. |
Facts: |
Robert Wasko, now 60 years of age, was a healthy, productive man who enjoyed his lifelong employment as a construction superintendent. He and Patricia Wasko have been happily married for over thirty years, and have two adult children.
On January 30, 1998, during a routine physical examination conducted by Mr. Wasko's primary care physician, defendant John D. Hill, M.D., blood was drawn from plaintiff, then 52 years of age, and submitted for a PSA test. The results of this test showed a PSA level of 2.0. On December 23, 2000, blood was again drawn from Mr. Wasko following a physical exam by Dr. Hill on December 13th, and submitted for a PSA test, among other testing. The results of that test showed a PSA level of 4.2, and the LabCorp report dated December 27th notes the result is high. However, Dr. Hill did not inform Mr. Wasko of the results of the test, nor did he recommend any follow-up care or re-check of his PSA level.
Dr. Hill's office notes reflect a visit by Mr. Wasko on January 9, 2001. There is no reference in that note to any discussion about Mr. Wasko's elevated PSA, the need for additional follow-up lab work or referral to a urologist. Mr. Wasko testified in his deposition he had no memory of this visit occurring.
Despite the fact that Dr. Hill saw Mr. Wasko for health concerns in August of 2001, August of 2002 and June of 2003, it was not until Mr. Wasko returned to Dr. Hill having had his PSA re-checked in March of 2004 by another physician when it was found to be 5.25, that he learned of his earlier elevated PSA reading.
Only then was Mr. Wasko referred to a urologist, and underwent a biopsy which revealed an adenocarcinoma of both the right and left lobes of the prostate. In September of 2004, Mr. Wasko underwent a prostatectomy that revealed the nature and extent of his prostate cancer. Surgical pathology revealed an aggressive lesion. There were positive margins, seminal vesicle involvement with evidence of vascular invasion and perineal invasion, and he was staged as a 3bMO.
Since the surgery, Mr. Wasko has undergone hormone therapy. Post-operatively, his PSA level began to rise again, which is a poor prognostic sign. It is anticipated that the hormone therapy can control his prostate cancer for approximately 18 months, after which, it will mutate to a form resistant to the hormone therapy and spread metastatically.
|
| Injury/Injuries: |
There is no cure for Mr. Wasko's prostate cancer. The only treatment available to him will be palliative. Plaintiffs' experts have testified that Mr. Wasko has a statistical probability of death within five years of the date of diagnosis. Mrs. Wasko also presented a claim for loss of consortium.
|
| Contentions: |
Plaintiffs alleged that Dr. Hill violated the standard of care by failing to immediately refer Mr. Wasko to a urologist for biopsy in December of 2000/January of 2001, or immediately had his PSA level re-tested, as well as testing for the association of free to bound PSA, and then referred to a urologist in short order. Defense's expert agreed that the standard of care required Dr. Hill to advise Mr. Wasko that his PSA of 4.2 was abnormally high and that he required follow-up blood works within one to six months. Further, plaintiffs allege that Dr. Hill again violated the standard of care on each and every subsequent occasion he saw Mr. Wasko, by failing to advise Mr. Wasko of his abnormal PSA, failing to refer him to a urologist or immediately re-checking the PSA level.
As a result of Dr. Hill's negligence, Mr. Wasko's prostate cancer went undiagnosed and untreated for approximately three and a half years. By the time it was diagnosed and treated, it had escaped the prostate capsule and had become incurable.
It is Dr. Hill's position that he advised Mr. Wasko of the abnormally high PSA of 4.2 in January of 2001 and provided him with lab slips to have his PSA re-checked in August of 2001. Defendant alleged that Mr. Wasko simply failed to get the lab work done.
|
| Special Notes: |
Plaintiffs made an initial settlement demand of $936,500, which included $250,000 for the settlement of Mrs. Wasko's potential wrongful death litigation.
Defendant's response to the demand was an offer to settle for $400,000.
On the day before Trial was to begin, plaintiffs agreed to attend a mediation hearing before Craig D. Higgs, Esq. in an attempt to resolve the matter. The case was settled on February 13, 2006, as to both plaintiffs for $550,000. The potential wrongful death action was not included in the final settlement.
|
|  |
|
|
|
