On August 31, 2023, a Wisconsin medical malpractice lawsuit was filed in which the plaintiff alleges:
Nestor Vega (“VEGA”) was involved in a motor vehicle collision on July 24, 2020. On that same day, VEGA presented to Froedtert Memorial Lutheran Hospital, Inc. (“FROEDTERT”) and the evaluation revealed a closed right pilon fracture. He was put into a splint with provisional reduction.
On July 25, 2020, VEGA underwent closed reduction and an external fixator of the right distal tibia pilon fracture.
On August 13, 2020, VEGA presented to FROEDTERT for a follow-up examination, wound check, pin care, and dressing changes in cast room. At such time, VEGA complained of a substantial persistent swelling to his ankle and foot since that resulted from his operation. Such pain continued despite elevation of his leg and ice application.
On September 2, 2020, VEGA underwent the removal of the right ankle external fixator and open reduction, internal fixation of right pilon fracture. The surgery was performed by DR. BECK, DR. TREMBLAY and DR. MIDDLETON. The procedure was videotaped and documented accordingly.
VEGA’s wound was thoroughly rinsed with copious amounts of sterile saline. A 10-French drain was placed and the wound was closed in a layered fashion. VEGA was then placed in soft dressings as well as a short leg splint.
During the attempt to remove the surgical drain from VEGA by DR. BECK, DR. TREMBLAY, and DR. MIDDLETON, a loud noise erupted which was the result of a piece of the drain fragment breaking off into the surgical area upon which the defendants were operating.
VEGA heard the noise and observed the subsequent attempts by the defendants to find and remove the drain fragment from inside his leg, to no avail. VEGA also witnessed other FROEDTERT medical staff enter his room to inquire as to the loud noise, and was advised by the defendants that a drain fragment had broken off inside VEGA’S ankle.
DR. BECK, RYAN, DR. BAYNARD, DR. TREMBLAY, and DR. MIDDLETON were present for the entirety of this procedure.
On September 3, 2020, DR. BAYNARD attended to VEGA, during which VEGA communicated experiencing intense pain, stating, “Something isn’t right, it feels like something is pulling” in addition to expressing his concern of infection resulting from the retained fragment.
VEGA expressed his concern of infection resulting from the retained fragment to each member of FROEDTERT medical staff he came in contact with but such concerns were dismissed without any reasonable justification. VEGA further pleaded for an X-ray to be taken but his continued pleas for an X-ray were denied.
Despite VEGA’s insistence to speak to his surgeon, DR. BECK refused to come back into VEGA’s room to address his concerns.
Above [sic] VEGA’s legitimate concerns, FROEDTERT medical staff expressed their intent to immediately discharge VEGA despite his continued pleas for assistance, requests for X-rays, communication from his surgeon, and his maintained concern of the foreign object still being left inside him.
While wrapping VEGA’s leg with bandages for discharge, DR. BAYNARD reassured VEGA that there was nothing left inside his leg. DR. BAYNARD further assured VEGA that even if the fragment was left, that it was “sterile” and would not cause an infection.
On September 3, 2020, VEGA was discharged after being provided with educational materials and discharge medications upon DR. BECK’s instruction.
Despite having knowledge of the retained fragment, neither DR. BECK, nor any other of the named defendants promptly performed or scheduled VEGA for removal of the fragment from the drain.
Despite clear evidence involving the challenges in the removal of the surgical drain from VEGA, and the retained fragment thereof, according to VEGA’s medical records, DR. BECK indicated “NONE” in response to whether there were complications resulting from said procedure.
DR. BECK and all other defendants failed to make any notation, whatsoever, of the complications and challenges experienced in removing the drain, the loud sound resulting from the break of the drain, and the known retention of the drain fragment inside VEGA.
On September 14, 2020, the defendant, DR. SYMANKI, a licensed radiologist, conducted an X-ray on VEGA as part of their post-operative care and follow-up visit at the Ortho Office in FROEDTERT. The findings were reviewed by DR. BECK and RYAN.
The defendants were responsible for properly reviewing, interpreting, and communicating the findings of the X-ray to the medical team.
Subsequent analysis of the X-ray revealed the presence of a linear foreign body or object that projected over the anterior (front) of the ankle indicating that it is an artifact or an object that’s not part of the patient’s anatomy, which was either overlooked, misinterpreted, or not adequately communicated to the medical team by the defendant.
During this time, DR. BECK and RYAN personally reviewed the findings of the X-ray and continually denied the prescence [sic] of any foreign objects in VEGA’s body.
As a consequence, VEGA’s condition continued to worsen, and he found himself in constant and grueling pain. The pain was so severe that it became unbearable for VEGA to carry out even the simplest daily activities. Every movement was accompanied by intense agony, and his ability to sleep, eat, and function normally was severely impaired.
The medical interventions provided were not effective in alleviating his suffering, and his quality of life was significantly impacted due to the retained fragment.
On November 9, 2020, a follow-up x-ray imaging was performed on VEGA. This exam was ordered by DR. BECK. The findings were further reviewed by RYAN under DR. BECK’s supervision and it suggested that the ankle mortise was partially obscured by hardware and that a surgical material reflecting off the surgical site was visible in the imaging which represents a fragment of a drain. The same record was acknowledged by DR. BECK.
Despite the second x-ray confirming the existence of a foreign object, and VEGA’s continued concern for infection, the retained fragment was not removed.
VEGA complained numerous times to both RYAN, DR. BECK, and other FROEDERT medical staff on each follow up visit, of his concerns and observation of the growing infection in his leg that he believed was a direct result of a foreign object being retained. Each time both RYAN, DR. BECK, and FROEDTERT medical staff dismissed such concerns and assured VEGA that nothing was wrong.
After almost 3.5 months of the foreign object residing inside VEGA’s leg, VEGA presented to FROEDTERT’s Emergency Department on December 13, 2020, for postoperative wound infection of his right leg, specifically, on the right distal tibia surgical site. The pain at his surgical site had worsened due to the infection and had started to display a reddish hue. The swelling and pain had increased and became unbearable. Intraoperative cultures were obtained showing bacterial growth, and VEGA was monitored for an infectious disease.
Surgical intervention was discussed with VEGA and was performed on December 15, 2020 by DR. BECK, Dr. Derek Parshall and Dr. Jonathan Bacos. The surgeons identified the segment of the retained drain upon its removal.
After the complete removal of the fragmented drain VEGA was cleared by therapy for discharge/transfer. VEGA was discharged on December 18, 2020.
After a short period of time following his discharge, VEGA began to experience a series of severe complications on his right ankle as a result of the Defendants’ flagrant negligence and failure to properly treat and timely remove the drain fragments in his right ankle.
On March 1, 2021, VEGA presented to FROEDTERT for an incision or wound complication. VEGA was referred to Dr. Jill Martin for a surgery for the persistent wound along the anterior aspect of his right ankle.
VEGA reported that he was frustrated with the prolonged series of surgeries and hospitalizations due to his leg fracture and infection. VEGA expressed that his anxiety and depression had intensified as a result of a lack of progress even after undergoing multiple surgical procedures.
VEGA presented to Tenderness Health Care on March 8, 2022 for his depression and reported that he has been interested in receiving skin graft but he is unable to do so due to conflicts with his medications. VEGA further complained of increasing bilateral leg pain and aggravation with standing and walking.
As a result of this incident, VEGA is still treating the permanent aftermath of his infections, physical disfigurement, and continues to suffer from an inability to properly walk, exercise, prolonged pain and suffering, nerve pain, emotional distress and anxiety, loss of enjoyment of life, and past and future income loss.
If you or a loved one may have been injured as a result of medical negligence in Wisconsin, you should promptly find a Wisconsin medical malpractice lawyer who may investigate your medical malpractice claim for you and represent you or your loved one in a Wisconsin medical malpractice case, if appropriate.
Click here to visit our website or call us toll-free in the United States at 800-295-3959 to find medical malpractice attorneys in Wisconsin, or in your U.S. state, who may assist you.
Turn to us when you don’t know where to turn.