Ted Smith recently obtained a defense verdict on behalf of two local vascular surgeons after 90 minutes of jury deliberations. Plaintiff alleged that the surgeons improperly proceeded with an emergent repair of Plaintiff’s abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA), failed to diagnose an endoleak in the post-operative period, and failed to diagnose an infected aneurysm that ultimately ruptured requiring additional surgical intervention. One of the defendant surgeons initially repaired the AAA by placing an endovascular stent to bypass the aneurysm. Plaintiff was then followed in the post-operative period by both defendants. The AAA ruptured approximately four months after the initial procedure, which required a second operation to save Plaintiff’s life.
Smith defended the case by showing the subsequent infection and rupture of the abdominal aortic aneurysm was not caused by an endoleak, but rather by a progressive inflammatory process, exacerbated by continued heavy smoking and long history of hypertension. Defendants’ expert demonstrated via diagnostic studies there was no leak in the endovascular stent in the post-operative period. The defense expert also opined there was significant inflammatory process around the abdominal aorta that slowly progressed and likely caused the subsequent rupture that required surgical intervention. Experts for both Plaintiff and Defendants testified that the Defendants’ actions saved Plaintiff’s life on multiple occasions.
