Dental Malpractice? Filling -> Root Canal -> Extraction/Implant

[Wes77]

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Hawaii

This is my first time posting here, and I really am not sure what to do. I hope someone out there might be able to provide some advice, as I feel somewhat awkward even thinking about suing.

Early this year, approx in March, I got my filling done on my lower left molar. The filling was fine. However, about a month later, I had developed extreme sensitivity in my top molar. I went back to find out that I needed to have a root canal done immediately. There was some difficulty, although I'm not sure what...I had to make 3 visits to complete the root canal. Maybe it was even 4. No cap was placed on my root canal. I talked to a friend, and he said this is an "old practice," and that I should get a second opinion on it. To this day, I still have some sensitivity in it.

So today, I visited a new dentist, recommended to me by family, and the xrays indicated 3 problems with the root canal - my molar had 3 roots: Root 1 had a short plug, Root 2 had a long plug that extended beyond the tooth bone, and the third issue is that the furcation of my molar _might_ have been punctured due to some dark shadowing around the furcation location in the xray. Root 1 and 2 had dark pockets indicating infection.

My dentist gave me 2 options: 1) see a specialist to possibly save my molar, or 2) extract and place an implant in it. I'm probably leaning towards 2 as even if my tooth were saved, a few years down the road, I may need to have it extracted anyway due to the damage already done.

My question is, can the dentist that originally have done my root canal not known he had punctured the furcation of my molar? Second, what should I do?

The kicker, a few weeks after my root canal, I had a filling done on the opposite lower molar, which led to the same type of pain. I went back to the dentist 2 days later, and he had to resurface the filling a bit. He said if I waited a little longer I might have had to have another root canal done. Please help. Thank you in advance.

[barry1817]

Originally Posted by Wes77

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Hawaii

This is my first time posting here, and I really am not sure what to do. I hope someone out there might be able to provide some advice, as I feel somewhat awkward even thinking about suing.

Early this year, approx in March, I got my filling done on my lower left molar. The filling was fine. However, about a month later, I had developed extreme sensitivity in my top molar. I went back to find out that I needed to have a root canal done immediately. There was some difficulty, although I'm not sure what...I had to make 3 visits to complete the root canal. Maybe it was even 4. No cap was placed on my root canal. I talked to a friend, and he said this is an "old practice," and that I should get a second opinion on it. To this day, I still have some sensitivity in it.

So today, I visited a new dentist, recommended to me by family, and the xrays indicated 3 problems with the root canal - my molar had 3 roots: Root 1 had a short plug, Root 2 had a long plug that extended beyond the tooth bone, and the third issue is that the furcation of my molar _might_ have been punctured due to some dark shadowing around the furcation location in the xray. Root 1 and 2 had dark pockets indicating infection.

My dentist gave me 2 options: 1) see a specialist to possibly save my molar, or 2) extract and place an implant in it. I'm probably leaning towards 2 as even if my tooth were saved, a few years down the road, I may need to have it extracted anyway due to the damage already done.

My question is, can the dentist that originally have done my root canal not known he had punctured the furcation of my molar? Second, what should I do?

The kicker, a few weeks after my root canal, I had a filling done on the opposite lower molar, which led to the same type of pain. I went back to the dentist 2 days later, and he had to resurface the filling a bit. He said if I waited a little longer I might have had to have another root canal done. Please help. Thank you in advance.

If the root canal was done by a general practice dentist, he is still liable to be held to the standard of care as if a specialist did the root canal. That being said, the x-rays that would have been taken during the root canal would have shown the same things that are being seen now.

So yes a dentist should know that a root canal filling is short, or that a root canal filling is long, or that he has missed a canal and perforated the tooth. Are there reasons for the appearance of being short--yes there are because where the nerve leaves the tooth isn't always at the longest/lowest point as shown on the x-ray. There are instrument that measure where the exact opening is for the nerve. Was this used to determine the proper length.

As to being long, that will always be evident on an x-ray. Can a person have a successful result with an overfill--that is possible.

Perforation is another issue that is the most serious because while one can argue about long or short, there is no arguing about a perforation. That becomes negligence, and the failure to inform is very problematic.

You now hit into the problem with the legal dental system. What to do about a situation that isn't profitable for an attorney to pursue. So it would be worth speaking to a malpractice attorney about getting the costs to correct the problem, and there might be ways to deal with this problem with a complaint to the state dental board as well as the possiblity of asking for peer review of this case.

The problem with peer review is that once done it precludes legal action and the most that peer review can do is get a refund of the funds you spent, but not force any corrective action by the dentist, or any financial obligation other than the refund. I know it doesn't seem right.

[Wes77]

Thanks for your response.

I forgot to mention that the filling is what I think actually led to the root canal...I think the fact that it was a little high caused irritation to my upper molar which led to the root canal in the first place.

But yeah, he did use this device that he put into the root and had another probe on my lip. He had a really hard time finding one, I distinctly remember because he had to move the probe all over.

I'm probably going to discuss this with my family attorney to see what's best. I just feel like I've been shortchanged for some reason.

[Wes77]

So I've still been thinking about this a lot...

The bottom line I'm trying to figure out is, does my last doctor bear some responsibility for the extraction/implant I have to do now? I can't figure it out...It just feels to me like yes, he is partially at fault. But I can't quite convince myself...

If so, can I just call him and talk to him? Or is it naive to do that?

[barry1817]

Originally Posted by Wes77

So I've still been thinking about this a lot...

The bottom line I'm trying to figure out is, does my last doctor bear some responsibility for the extraction/implant I have to do now? I can't figure it out...It just feels to me like yes, he is partially at fault. But I can't quite convince myself...

If so, can I just call him and talk to him? Or is it naive to do that?

In order to have a legal case you need to show negligence, that the negligence caused the problem and that there is a financial component to the problem.

You show negligence one would need to have a dentist look at the x-rays and examine the treatment and if the result was negligent. If the dentist that did the treatment is not a root canal specialist you would want a specialist to to the review as in a court of law, the word of a specialist will be given a lot more weight when testifying to a problem that a general dentist is going to defend.

Is there enough money in a case if there was negligence. You have the costs of the treatment, and possible replacement down the line that would be part of the correction. An attorney would have to determine the costs and if there can be any punitive awards given.

In several previous cases, treatment that was substandard has been called a fraud, because you were paying for a treatment and the treatment wasn't what should have been done. It is an interesting tactic to use, but one that has the potential to be valuable in dealing with a case, if the negligence is shown to have existed and to have been the cause of the problem.

You do have a clock running on what you will determine to do.