Syracuse Medical Malpractice and Personal Injury Lawyer Blog
A hysterectomy can become far more dangerous when a nearby ureter sustains damage, causing leakage and additional treatment. A surgical complication alone, however, does not establish malpractice. Instead, an injured patient must present expert evidence identifying a departure from accepted practice and connecting it to the harm, which typically requires expert testimony. A recent New York opinion demonstrates, however, that expert testimony that relies on a theory contradicted by the operative record or ignores the defense explanation may not be sufficient to sustain a claim. If you sustained injuries during a gynecological surgery, it is in your best interest to consult a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney to assess your potential claims.
Case Setting
Allegedly, the plaintiff underwent a hysterectomy at the defendant hospital to remove a cancerous tumor. Two defendant physicians performed the procedure. The plaintiff later sustained damage to her right ureter, the tube that carries urine from the kidney to the bladder, and developed leakage several days after surgery. She asserted that the defendants negligently failed to protect the ureter, injured it during the operation, and failed to perform appropriate postoperative testing.
Reportedly, the defendants maintained that they followed accepted practice. They argued that ureter damage is a recognized hysterectomy risk and that the plaintiff’s size, smoking history, and tumor-distorted anatomy increased that risk. Their expert concluded that the surgeons protected and visualized intact ureters and reasonably declined further testing because leakage appeared days later.
It is alleged that the plaintiff’s expert attributed the injury to surgical clamps that crushed the ureter and caused it to rupture as pressure accumulated. The expert also asserted that the defendants should have inserted ureteral catheters before surgery or created a protective tunnel. The trial court granted summary judgment dismissing the ureter-injury claims and declined to strike the defendants’ culpable-conduct defense. The plaintiff appealed both rulings.
Evaluating Expert Proof in a Surgical Malpractice Claim
On appeal, the court explained that providers seeking summary judgment must offer expert evidence showing compliance with accepted practice. The plaintiff must then demonstrate a triable issue concerning both departure and causation. Although conflicting, well-supported opinions usually require a trial; conclusory theories or those contradicted by the record cannot defeat dismissal.
The defendants met their initial burden. Their expert explained that ureter damage can occur despite proper technique and that the plaintiff faced elevated risks. The surgeons created protective space, observed intact ureters, and had no reason to perform a cystoscopy, which would reveal a bladder injury rather than the damage at issue.
The defense expert further distinguished between immediate mechanical trauma and delayed vascular damage. A cut or crushed ureter would likely have produced visible leakage during surgery or signs of rapid deterioration. By contrast, reduced blood flow can take days to damage the tissue, matching the plaintiff’s postoperative course.
The court found that the plaintiff’s expert did not create a factual dispute. His claim that the surgeon failed to create a protective tunnel conflicted with the operative record and testimony. More importantly, he did not address the defense explanation that loss of blood supply caused delayed damage that could not have been detected during surgery. The court deemed that omission fatal. It also rejected the challenge to testimony about the surgeon’s customary practice and upheld the culpable-conduct defense because an earlier appellate ruling had already resolved that issue. As such, the court unanimously affirmed the challenged order.
Talk to a Capable Syracuse Medical Malpractice Attorney
Serious complications after gynecological surgery deserve a careful investigation, particularly when they lead to organ damage or further procedures. If you suffered harm during a surgical procedure, it is wise to talk to an attorney about your rights. The capable Syracuse medical malpractice attorneys at DeFrancisco & Falgiatano Personal Injury Lawyers are committed to helping injured patients pursue accountability and meaningful compensation, and if you hire us, we will work tirelessly on your behalf. Contact us through our online form or call 833-200-2000 to arrange a free, confidential consultation.
