Doctors Sued after Delayed Diagnosis Resulted in Miscarriage
In August 2014, while in France, Lourdes Ameziani believed she was pregnant and confirmed it with a home test. She contacted her New York obstetrician, Dr. Selitsky, who advised her to visit the office for a definitive blood test. Returning home the next day, August 6, she experienced severe nausea and abdominal pain. After a blood test confirmed her pregnancy, 41-year-old Ms. Ameziani was prescribed Tylenol for her discomfort. Later that day, her pain worsened, and Dr. Selitsky advised an ultrasound with radiologist Dr. Subramanyam to rule out ectopic pregnancy or other gynecological risks, providing a referral for the visit.
Based on these tests an ectopic pregnancy was excluded but Ms. Ameziani continued to experience severe pain, particularly on the right side of her abdomen. The radiologist, Dr. Subramanyam did not advise her of any other complications and on reviewing his reports Dr. Selitsky advised Ms. Ameziani to visit the emergency room if her pain or discomfort increased and did not suggest a mandatory admission to the emergency room or further diagnosis. The same evening, Ms. Ameziani contacted Dr. Selitsky’s office, still experiencing excruciating pain and requested an admission. The on-call physician advised her that the symptoms sounded akin to appendicitis and that she should call an ambulance. She did so and was subsequently admitted to the hospital. Later that evening, her appendix ruptured, necessitating emergency surgery. The physicians discovered peritonitis, gangrene, and an infection which possibly hinted towards a delayed diagnosis of a grown appendix. Due to the surgery, Ms. Ameziani also had a miscarriage.
The Trial
As soon as Lourdes Ameziani recovered, she filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against her obstetrician, Dr. Selitsky and radiologist, Dr. Subramanyam alleging that the delayed diagnosis increased the severity of the injury causing a miscarriage. Lourdes Ameziani testified in this lawsuit that she informed Dr. Subramanyam of her nausea, a claim that he denied. According to Dr. Subramanyam, the ultrasound was only performed to ascertain the cause of her symptoms and exclude the possibility of an ectopic pregnancy, which he successfully accomplished. Additionally, he stated that he was unable to visualize the appendix and that evaluating it was beyond his level of proficiency. The court also invited expert professionals to share their opinion and based on testimonies presented and the expert opinions, the Court determined that Dr. Subramanyam, who not only performed the ultrasound but also selected the appropriate equipment and interpreted the results of the ultrasound study, was obligated to accurately interpret the results, communicate them to Lourdes Ameziani’s treating physician, Dr. Selitsky, and perform the ultrasound in a manner that was both accurate and thorough.
In the instance of Dr. Selitsky, Ms. Ameziani underscored Dr. Selitsky's negligence for failing to advise her to proceed to the emergency room following the ultrasound, which was cited as a deviation from the standard of care. This resulted in a delay in the diagnosis of appendicitis, which subsequently elevated the likelihood of infection and miscarriage. While Dr. Selitsky refuted these claims, the Court determined that the standard of care necessitated Dr. Selitsky to unequivocally refer Ms. Ameziani to the emergency room and implement additional measures to assess her condition. The Court also acknowledged Ms. Ameziani's contributory negligence in postponing her emergency room visit and ultimately Dr. Selitsky's motion for summary judgment was denied.
The Verdict
The jury determined that Dr. Selitsky, Dr. Subramanyam, and Lourdes Ameziani were proportionately negligent during the damages trial. Dr. Selitsky was apportioned 30%, Dr. Subramanyam was apportioned 41%, and Ms. Ameziani was apportioned 29% of the $725,000 awarded for agony and suffering over the past seven years. Dr. Selitsky reached an agreement with Ms. Ameziani subsequent to the verdict, while Dr. Subramanyam filed an appeal. The argument in the appeal was that the delayed diagnosis and subsequent injuries were not significantly influenced by Ms. Ameziani's ultrasound report, which did not exclude appendicitis. The Appellate Court acknowledged Dr. Selitsky's testimony that the referral was intended to ascertain whether the discomfort was gynecological and that she did not rely on Dr. Subramanyam's report after ruling out an ectopic pregnancy. The Court determined that Dr. Subramanyam was negligent; however, Ms. Ameziani did not present any evidence that connected his negligence to her tardiness in visiting the emergency room and granted the appeal in Dr. Subramanyam’s favor.
The Sternberg Injury Law Firm
In litigation, a plaintiff typically must prove that the defendant committed a wrongdoing. However, this alone may not suffice; the plaintiff must also demonstrate that the defendant’s misconduct directly caused their harm. Without establishing this causal link, the court may dismiss the case as in case of appeal in the case of Ameziani v Subramanyam. Sternberg Injury Law Firm offers complimentary consultations for individuals who have lost a loved one or relative as a result of someone else’s negligence. Our attorneys are proficient in Personal Injury Law and are dedicated to obtaining the highest potential compensation for you. Our firm first opened in 2016 and we accept cases all over New York, including Island Park, Lake Success, and Nissequogue. Upon your retention of our firm, our attorneys will conduct a comprehensive review of the case with you, provide you with information regarding your alternatives, and inform you of the ways in which our firm can offer assistance. We can be contacted via email, text, or by submitting our web form.