What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? North Carolina
First, I am SORRY for making this long but it is the shortest I could make it to include ALL the relevant details.
I was referred to a cardiologist by my pediatrician for a murmur. On the referral form it says "Evaluate new murmur - possible functional". Pediatrician also sent me to a hospital for EKG, which I get done at hospital. Then, days later, I get this voice message from my pediatrician's nurse:
"Left side is enlarged - not sure what's going on - what significance does that mean. I would definitely keep your appointment, they [cardiologist referred to] will discuss the EKG. They'll have this record and go into details of what this means."
However, I heard this message after my visit to cardiologist.
So anyway, I see my cardiologist. We talk about some unrelated stuff and then he briefly asks me some questions. "Do you get chest pain when you're walking, active?" I couldn't finish answering this because I am interrupted. "Does your heart flutter" Couldn't answer this one either because cardiologist interrupts with the following question "Do you ever pass out?" I said 'No'. Then, "Do you have swelling in your legs?" 'No', again. "Do you feel dizzy when you stand up?" 'Maybe like 1 time', was my answer. "Have you ever had a blood clot?" 'No'. "Does your dad have heart trouble?" my answer: 'Yes.' "What kind?" 'I don't know.' "Is there anyone in the family who died suddenly?" 'Yes, my great-grandmother.'
Later on, after testing blood pressure, listening to heart, etc., cardiologist asks me a second time whether I've had swelling in my legs, to which of course I say 'No.' Then asks me if my chest pain gets worse with certain food and not with activity or anything else, to which I said 'Yes, but I still had chest pain after fasting (so it wasn't caused by food).'
Towards the end, he schedules me an ultrasound of heart to see what my murmur is, and noted that he doesn't think it may be "anything serious", and an ultrasound of arteries in neck. He then says "I think we're going to find that your heart is okay ... and if that's the case, things are fine."
In the very end I notice that my cardiologist says absolutely nothing about the EKG he was supposed to "go into details" and that he's preparing to leave, so I ask him about the EKG. His response: "EKG was beautiful." So I get the ultrasounds done, come home, listen to my voice messages and hear my pediatrician's nurse voicemail that says that the EKG showed enlargement. At this point I panic and experience something akin to a trauma. I get extreme worries that my cardiologist has lied to me and wants me to die. I remember that I actually get mixed thoughts; I'd think that maybe nothing can be done to my heart now so I am being lied to and my actual prognosis is death.
A day or two later I receive a call from cardiologist's nurse. She says ultrasound of heart was a "normal study - normal pumping function or squeezing function of heart, no valve disease. So that was a good report ... Ultrasound of arteries showed no plaque on either side and [cardiologist] is not suggesting any changes here. Those [studies] looked really good."
Other pertinent events:
In February of 2012 I experience unusual squeezing chest pain with palpitations that began when walking. It was so bad I was considering going to the hospital's trauma center, but did not.
In March of 2012 I go to my local hospital, with which my cardiologist is affiliated, because of very bad chest pain. I will not share any more information as I do not want to sue the hospital.
In that same month, I have a scheduled follow-up visit with my cardiologist. The only relevant thing I can remember from that visit is that he tells me my heart is "strong" and that I can go swimming. I also got a stress echocardiogram, which, like the first tests, was normal. Below are the details of stress exercise test results:
"A treadmill exercise test according to Ramped Bruce protocol was performed. The baseline ECG displays normal sinus rhythm. No stress induced ST changes to suggest ischemia. Total stress time achieved was 1.6 minutes. A total of 2.7 METS was achieved. This represents 10% of the expected exercise capacity.
Resting heart rate was 108 BPM. Peak heart rate achieved was 131 BPM. This represents 65% of maximum predicated heart rate. Exercise was stopped due to leg pain. Blood pressure at rest was 128/80 mmHg. Blood pressure at peak stress was 138/74 mmHg. No arrhythmia was noted during stress. There was no new ST segment depression with stress. The left ventricle is normal in size. There is no thrombus. There is normal left ventricular wall thickness. Left ventricular systolic function is normal and is estimated at >55%. No regional wall motion abnormalities noted. The right ventricle is grossly normal size.
The left atrium is normal size. Right atrial size is normal. The mitral valve is normal. There is no mitral regurgitation noted. The tricuspid valve is normal in structure and function. No tricuspid regurgitation. The aortic valve moves normally. No hemodynamically significant valvular aortic stenosis. No aortic regurgitation is present. The pulmonic valve is normal in structure and function. There is no pulmonic valvular regurgitation. The aortic root is normal size. The pulmonary artery is normal size. There is no pericardial effusion. There is no pleural effusion. A complete treadmill stress with two-dimensional transthoracic echocardiogram was performed (2D, M-mode, Doppler and color flow Doppler). Technically limited apical views due to cardiac positioning. Low workload achieved. No ischemia at sumaximal heart rate. Left ventricular systolic function is normal and is estimated at >55%. No obvious regional wall motion abnormalities noted."
Here is why I am asking if I can sue this cardiologist:
In May of 2012 I get an echocardiogram at a very reputed hospital, one of the best in my state. This echo shows:
"Normal left ventricular size. Normal left ventricular systolic function. Normal left ventricular wall motion. Normal right ventricular size. Normal right ventricular function. Mild mitral regurgitation. Mild tricuspid regurgitation. Small pericardial effusion. Anterior mitral leaflet prolapse with posteriorly directed jet. Severity of MR jet could be underestimated due to the eccentric jet."
Then says, "Consider echo follow-up."
I also got an EKG at this hospital, which, interestingly, only showed Sinus Tachycardia and no enlargement of heart.
So, do I have a case here and if so, how much would I win, assuming I can find a lawyer and still sue after 2 1/2 years? Also, even though I have seen psychiatrists/psychologists and complained a lot about the trauma received from my experience with this cardiologist and the complete distrust I now have in doctors as a result of the lies, I do NOT wish to include the psychological side in my lawsuit, just the lies.
I am also worried that the cardiologist will argue the prolapse was missed because it's just one leaflet and that my condition worsened in those two months (from stress echo to abnormal echo at reputed hospital). Or, that it simply appeared on that echo and not his as prolapses may rarely go away and re-appear. However, I still do not understand how he acknowledged the murmur I was referred with and then told me the echocardiograms show no regurgitation. I mean, my referring pediatrician said the murmur was III/IV and harsh.
Want expert opinions only and will possibly recompense for honest, helpful advice. Thank you.
First, I am SORRY for making this long but it is the shortest I could make it to include ALL the relevant details.
I was referred to a cardiologist by my pediatrician for a murmur. On the referral form it says "Evaluate new murmur - possible functional". Pediatrician also sent me to a hospital for EKG, which I get done at hospital. Then, days later, I get this voice message from my pediatrician's nurse:
"Left side is enlarged - not sure what's going on - what significance does that mean. I would definitely keep your appointment, they [cardiologist referred to] will discuss the EKG. They'll have this record and go into details of what this means."
However, I heard this message after my visit to cardiologist.
So anyway, I see my cardiologist. We talk about some unrelated stuff and then he briefly asks me some questions. "Do you get chest pain when you're walking, active?" I couldn't finish answering this because I am interrupted. "Does your heart flutter" Couldn't answer this one either because cardiologist interrupts with the following question "Do you ever pass out?" I said 'No'. Then, "Do you have swelling in your legs?" 'No', again. "Do you feel dizzy when you stand up?" 'Maybe like 1 time', was my answer. "Have you ever had a blood clot?" 'No'. "Does your dad have heart trouble?" my answer: 'Yes.' "What kind?" 'I don't know.' "Is there anyone in the family who died suddenly?" 'Yes, my great-grandmother.'
Later on, after testing blood pressure, listening to heart, etc., cardiologist asks me a second time whether I've had swelling in my legs, to which of course I say 'No.' Then asks me if my chest pain gets worse with certain food and not with activity or anything else, to which I said 'Yes, but I still had chest pain after fasting (so it wasn't caused by food).'
Towards the end, he schedules me an ultrasound of heart to see what my murmur is, and noted that he doesn't think it may be "anything serious", and an ultrasound of arteries in neck. He then says "I think we're going to find that your heart is okay ... and if that's the case, things are fine."
In the very end I notice that my cardiologist says absolutely nothing about the EKG he was supposed to "go into details" and that he's preparing to leave, so I ask him about the EKG. His response: "EKG was beautiful." So I get the ultrasounds done, come home, listen to my voice messages and hear my pediatrician's nurse voicemail that says that the EKG showed enlargement. At this point I panic and experience something akin to a trauma. I get extreme worries that my cardiologist has lied to me and wants me to die. I remember that I actually get mixed thoughts; I'd think that maybe nothing can be done to my heart now so I am being lied to and my actual prognosis is death.
A day or two later I receive a call from cardiologist's nurse. She says ultrasound of heart was a "normal study - normal pumping function or squeezing function of heart, no valve disease. So that was a good report ... Ultrasound of arteries showed no plaque on either side and [cardiologist] is not suggesting any changes here. Those [studies] looked really good."
Other pertinent events:
In February of 2012 I experience unusual squeezing chest pain with palpitations that began when walking. It was so bad I was considering going to the hospital's trauma center, but did not.
In March of 2012 I go to my local hospital, with which my cardiologist is affiliated, because of very bad chest pain. I will not share any more information as I do not want to sue the hospital.
In that same month, I have a scheduled follow-up visit with my cardiologist. The only relevant thing I can remember from that visit is that he tells me my heart is "strong" and that I can go swimming. I also got a stress echocardiogram, which, like the first tests, was normal. Below are the details of stress exercise test results:
"A treadmill exercise test according to Ramped Bruce protocol was performed. The baseline ECG displays normal sinus rhythm. No stress induced ST changes to suggest ischemia. Total stress time achieved was 1.6 minutes. A total of 2.7 METS was achieved. This represents 10% of the expected exercise capacity.
Resting heart rate was 108 BPM. Peak heart rate achieved was 131 BPM. This represents 65% of maximum predicated heart rate. Exercise was stopped due to leg pain. Blood pressure at rest was 128/80 mmHg. Blood pressure at peak stress was 138/74 mmHg. No arrhythmia was noted during stress. There was no new ST segment depression with stress. The left ventricle is normal in size. There is no thrombus. There is normal left ventricular wall thickness. Left ventricular systolic function is normal and is estimated at >55%. No regional wall motion abnormalities noted. The right ventricle is grossly normal size.
The left atrium is normal size. Right atrial size is normal. The mitral valve is normal. There is no mitral regurgitation noted. The tricuspid valve is normal in structure and function. No tricuspid regurgitation. The aortic valve moves normally. No hemodynamically significant valvular aortic stenosis. No aortic regurgitation is present. The pulmonic valve is normal in structure and function. There is no pulmonic valvular regurgitation. The aortic root is normal size. The pulmonary artery is normal size. There is no pericardial effusion. There is no pleural effusion. A complete treadmill stress with two-dimensional transthoracic echocardiogram was performed (2D, M-mode, Doppler and color flow Doppler). Technically limited apical views due to cardiac positioning. Low workload achieved. No ischemia at sumaximal heart rate. Left ventricular systolic function is normal and is estimated at >55%. No obvious regional wall motion abnormalities noted."
Here is why I am asking if I can sue this cardiologist:
In May of 2012 I get an echocardiogram at a very reputed hospital, one of the best in my state. This echo shows:
"Normal left ventricular size. Normal left ventricular systolic function. Normal left ventricular wall motion. Normal right ventricular size. Normal right ventricular function. Mild mitral regurgitation. Mild tricuspid regurgitation. Small pericardial effusion. Anterior mitral leaflet prolapse with posteriorly directed jet. Severity of MR jet could be underestimated due to the eccentric jet."
Then says, "Consider echo follow-up."
I also got an EKG at this hospital, which, interestingly, only showed Sinus Tachycardia and no enlargement of heart.
So, do I have a case here and if so, how much would I win, assuming I can find a lawyer and still sue after 2 1/2 years? Also, even though I have seen psychiatrists/psychologists and complained a lot about the trauma received from my experience with this cardiologist and the complete distrust I now have in doctors as a result of the lies, I do NOT wish to include the psychological side in my lawsuit, just the lies.
I am also worried that the cardiologist will argue the prolapse was missed because it's just one leaflet and that my condition worsened in those two months (from stress echo to abnormal echo at reputed hospital). Or, that it simply appeared on that echo and not his as prolapses may rarely go away and re-appear. However, I still do not understand how he acknowledged the murmur I was referred with and then told me the echocardiograms show no regurgitation. I mean, my referring pediatrician said the murmur was III/IV and harsh.
Want expert opinions only and will possibly recompense for honest, helpful advice. Thank you.