Verdict in Automated Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Defect Case: A medical malpractice jury reached a defense verdict on behalf of a New York hospital in a New York medical malpractice case in which the plaintiff alleged that he suffered from constant and painful electrical shocks after the surgical implantation on an automated implantable cardioverter defibrillator device (AICD).
The 61-year-old plaintiff alleged that the implantation of the AICD device by a cardiac electrophysiologist was done improperly. The plaintiff claimed that he suffered between 500 and 600 electric shocks from the device that lasted for 20 days before he underwent a lead revision. Some of the shocks the plaintiff claimed to have received were allegedly sufficient to lift him into the air, which the defense argued was impossible.
The defense argued that the implantation of the AICD was without complications and in all respects was performed within the standard of care. The defense was able to show that the defibrillator never sent shocks to the plaintiff and the defense argued that the plaintiff’s testimony regarding electric shocks was probably caused by a simple fear of the device (the plaintiff was avoiding electrical appliances, water, and magnets at home). The defense noted that the plaintiff claimed that while suffering from the alleged shocks, he left telephone messages at the hospital for a week but he did not call 911 or follow his discharge instructions to return to the emergency room if he had any issues.
Seven days after the implantation of the device, the plaintiff called 911 and went to another hospital, where he made completely different complaints to both the paramedics and the attending physician, both of whom were subpoenaed to testify at trial to attack the plaintiff’s credibility as to what his actual complaints were (i.e., normal post-surgical chest pain).
The defense also argued to the jury that the plaintiff retained an expert who had no experience with surgery, despite that being the focus of his claim. Furthermore, there were numerous family members present in the courtroom who had supposedly witnessed the plaintiff’s “shocks,” but none of them were called to testify on his behalf.
From 12% to 21% of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) patients receive at least one inappropriate shock at some point after device implantation. Causes of inappropriate discharge include external noise, atrial dysrhythmias or oversensing, muscle myopotentials, lead-connector or mechanical faults, and electromagnetic interference (EMI). Inappropriate discharge for improperly sensed atrial dysrhythmias remains relatively frequent; however, advanced technological specifications used in the production and programming of newer devices have minimized EMI as a cause of inappropriate discharge.
If you or a loved one suffered harm due to medical negligence in New York or in another U.S. state, you should promptly find a New York medical malpractice attorney or a medical malpractice attorney in your state who may investigate your medical malpractice claim for you and represent you or your loved one in a medical malpractice case, if appropriate.
Click on the “Contact Us Now” tab to the right, visit our website, or call us toll-free in the United States at 800-295-3959 to find medical malpractice lawyers in your state who may assist you.
Turn to us when you don’t know where to turn.