In medical malpractice litigation, timing can be everything, especially when a diagnosis is allegedly delayed. When a physician fails to order appropriate testing or pursue a differential diagnosis, it can have irreversible consequences for the patient. A recent New York decision highlights how disputes over whether a delay in diagnosis impacted a patient’s prognosis can preclude dismissal of a case before trial. If you or someone you love has been harmed due to delayed medical care, a Syracuse medical malpractice attorney can help evaluate your potential claims.
Factual Background and Procedural Setting
It is alleged that the decedent was under the care of a urologist between August 2017 and August 2018 after experiencing urinary symptoms, including burning during urination and nocturia. The plaintiff, acting as administrator of the decedent’s estate, filed a medical malpractice and wrongful death action against the physician and related medical entities. The plaintiff asserted that the defendant failed to timely diagnose the decedent’s prostate cancer, which was ultimately discovered in August 2018 at stage IV with bone metastases.
It is reported that the decedent initially presented with urinary complaints in August 2017, at which time the defendant performed a physical examination and offered a PSA test, which the defendant claimed the decedent declined. Follow-up visits included treatments for benign prostatic hyperplasia, and in February 2018, the defendant performed a transurethral vaporization of the prostate. No tumors were observed during this procedure, but the plaintiff alleged that a different procedure, transurethral resection of the prostate, would have allowed for tissue biopsy and led to an earlier diagnosis.
It is further reported that the decedent returned to the defendant for additional care in April and August 2018, still experiencing urinary symptoms. He was later diagnosed at another facility with stage IV prostate cancer. The plaintiff alleged that the physician’s failure to order follow-up PSA testing, failure to consider a differential diagnosis, and failure to respond appropriately to ongoing symptoms delayed the cancer diagnosis and significantly diminished the decedent’s prognosis and life expectancy.
Grounds for Pursuing Lack of Informed Consent Claims
The court first addressed the physician’s motion to dismiss the claim for lack of informed consent. Under Public Health Law § 2805-d, informed consent claims must arise from affirmative medical procedures that breach bodily integrity. Because the plaintiff’s allegations were based on omissions and failures to diagnose rather than on any invasive procedures performed without proper consent, the court dismissed that portion of the complaint.
However, the court found that the physician’s motion to dismiss the malpractice and wrongful death claims could not be granted. In support of the motion, the defendant submitted expert affirmations from specialists in urology and oncology, both asserting that the care provided met the standard of practice. The experts maintained that even if the cancer had been diagnosed in August 2017, it would have already been metastatic, and earlier intervention would not have altered the outcome.
The plaintiff countered with expert affirmations from board-certified specialists who opined that the decedent had a history of elevated PSA levels and that the failure to repeat the PSA test or perform a prostate biopsy deviated from accepted medical standards. The plaintiff’s experts argued that the decedent’s symptoms should have prompted further investigation and that earlier diagnosis could have improved his treatment options and life expectancy. They also emphasized inconsistencies in the defendant’s assertion that a PSA test had been offered, which the plaintiff denied.
The court emphasized that medical malpractice plaintiffs are not required to prove that a delay in diagnosis would have cured the condition. Rather, they must show that the delay reduced the chance of a better outcome or caused additional injury. Based on the conflicting expert testimony, the court concluded that there were triable issues of fact regarding whether the defendant’s actions deviated from accepted standards and whether the delay in diagnosis adversely affected the decedent’s condition. The motion to dismiss the malpractice and derivative loss of services claims was therefore denied.
Confer with a Trusted Syracuse Medical Malpractice Attorney
When physicians fail to diagnose serious conditions in a timely manner, the consequences can be devastating. While not every delay rises to the level of malpractice, courts recognize that patients are entitled to pursue claims when earlier intervention may have improved the outcome. If you believe that a delayed diagnosis or mismanagement of symptoms contributed to a loved one’s decline, the experienced Syracuse medical malpractice attorneys at DeFrancisco & Falgiatano Personal Injury Lawyers are ready to help. Call us at 833-200-2000 or contact us online to schedule a free consultation and discuss your legal options.