On March 4, 2011 the Pittsburgh Tribune Review published a story confirming that 141 patients may have received unneeded cardiac stents at its cardiac care lab in 2010. These stents were placed by Drs Ehab Morcos and George Bousamra, interventional cardiologists with staff privileges at Exhela Health Westmoreland.
Multiple lawsuits on behalf of many of these unfortunate patients have ensued.
Robert Rogalski, CEO of Excela, Westmoreland's Greensburg based parent, issued a public apology. In so doing, Mr Rogalski, informed Tribune Review staff reporters that an internal investigation into whether any unnecessary stents were placed at Westmoreland Hospital in 2009 was ongoing. Specifically, The Trib reported that hospital officials indicated that results of the review of their 2009 cases are expected in May. Well, May has come and gone and yet no results have been divulged. Perhaps Excela/Westmoreland meant May 2012 !
Coronary stents are appropriate when the percentage of arterial blockage exceeds 70%. If a particular coronary artery is not at least close to 70% occluded then a stent should not be inserted. It will not offer any
benefit and carries with it an unnecessary risk of complications such as the risk of blood clots. The fact that this occurred leads to numerous additional questions.
Who knew that this was happening and when did they know? How much money did the doctors make on the placement of the unneeded stents? Did the hospital receive a benefit from these unnecessary procedures? If so, what was the benefit? Was anyone at Excela supervising these doctors? How long has this been going on? Has anyone died unnecessarily? Did management at Excela ever compare the number of procedures that Drs Morcos and Bousamra were doing to the number performed by other cardiologists and radiologists at Westmoreland? Did management compare the number of procedures performed by these doctors against the industry average? Is medeicaid or medicare money involved?
Has the federal government initiated an investigation?
In order to determine the percentage of blockage an angiogram must be performed. How do the doctors or the hospital defend the decision to insert stents in situations where an angiogram clearly shows blockage significantly below 70 percent? Did the doctors misrepresent the percentage of blockage in the medical records? Were other staff members in on it?
If you believe that you or a family member may have been the recipient of an unneeded stent or that you are the victim of medical malpractice please contact my law office today.
No comments:
Post a Comment