Maryland Stent Medical Malpractice

Harvey Kirk

By Harvey Kirk
Posted March 8, 2007

ADD YOUR COMMENTS

Today, Peninsula Regional Medical Center in Salisbury, Maryland announced that at least 25 unnecessary stent placements were performed by one cardiologist, exposing patients to stent problems which could lead to an increased risk of potentially deadly blood clots.  While the hospital and doctor attempt to suggest a vision problem led to the medical mistakes, it appears more likely that profits were a motivating factor.

>>INFORMATION: Drug Eluting Stent Dangers

Stents are small wire devices which are designed to be inserted into blocked arteries to prop them open and keep blood flowing.  Since last fall, a lot of national attention has been focused on the widespread overuse of drug eluting stents.  Research indicates that the devices carry a statistically significant increased risk of blood clots, which could lead to a re-blockage of the artery, a heart attack or death.

The heart stent problems could occur days, months or even years after the stents are placed.  Experts have estimated that approximately 2,000 deaths each year could have been caused by the use of drug eluting stents, and most cardiologists are now ensuring that the devices are only implanted into patients who meet the FDA approved profile.

Since drug coated stents were introduced in 2003, they have quickly grown to account for approximately 90% of all stents placed in the United States.  Some reports indicate that as few as 20% of all patients who received the devices met the approved profile.  As a result of the wide-spread overuse and concerns about stent risks, an FDA advisory panel recently stressed the importance that physicians only place the devices in patients who meet the published stent recommendations.

MARYLAND STENT MISTAKES

According to initial reports, a Maryland cardiologist, John R. McLean, M.D., performed at least 25 stent placements on patients who were well outside of the recommended guidelines.  While the American College of Cardiology recommends that patients have an artery that is at least 70% blocked, Dr. McLean inserted stents at the Maryland hospital in patients with blockages as low as 35 percent, which exposes them to unnecessary risk of stent problems.

At the time of the announcement, the hospital suggested that a “recently diagnosed” vision problem caused the doctor to misread 25 different patients’ diagnostic reports.  However, it appears more likely that a desire for profits was placed ahead of patient safety.

Hospitals, cardiologists and stent placement specialists have a financial incentive to recommend the use of medicated stents for treatment of partially blocked arteries instead of alternative therapies, such as medications.  Stents account for approximately $6 billion in sales each year, and hospitals charge around $10,000 to $15,000 per patient to implant them.

>>INFORMATION: Overuse of medicated stents

According to the Associated Press, Dr. McLean has not had any prior Maryland medical malpractice judgments filed against him in the last 10 years.  It remains to be seen what actions will be taken against the physician or Peninsula Regional Medical Center, but there could be administrative hearings, medical malpractice lawsuits or possibly even criminal fraud charges.

MEDICAL MALPRACTICE LAWYERS

The attorneys at Saiontz & Kirk, P.A. represents individuals who have suffered problems after receiving a drug eluting stent as well as those who were injured by medical mistakes.  While cases are investigated and pursued nationwide, our main offices are located in Maryland.  For more information about medical malpractice or drug eluting stent lawsuits, request a free consultation with one of our lawyers.

No Comments • Add Your Comments

Add Your Comments

  • Have Your Comments Reviewed by a Lawyer

    Provide contact information below and additional private comments if you want an attorney to contact you to review a potential case.

    The information below will not be published to this page.

  • NOTE: Providing information for review by an attorney does not form an attorney-client relationship.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.