Colonoscopy gone bad

hospital | 10/13/02 | self

[Cobra64]

Man almost bled to death as a result of a colonoscopy.

[CobaltBlue]

Wow, just noticed this happened in 2002!?!

[beezdotcom]

many law suits are filed because of the arrogance and lack of compassion of doctors.

That's also the same reason that some doctors make mistakes - arrogance and lack of compassion can make you miss important details.

[kittymyrib]

Physician errors and medicine mix-ups in hospitals are responsible for over 100,000 deaths each year. Some years ago, doctors went on strike for a couple of weeks. When it became embarrassingly obvious that the death rate was plummeting, they decided to end their strike. Think about that when you consider checking into a hospital.

[Twinkie]

Sounds like your intestine may have been perforated. You should not have had that kind of problem with a procedure that is apparently considered a mostly routine one. - For a very long time, doctors simply buried their mistakes; but, now malpractice suits (love 'em or hate 'em) have stopped a lot of that.

[TC Rider]

FYI--Prilosec is not the "purple pill" so you're insecurities and suggestions with regards to it were misguided. Nexium in the "purple pill" which you were looking to point blame on, but beings it isn't the prescribed medication your wife was taking, you have misguided your anger. Do your research before you cause an uproar amongst people who really desire to find the true casue of their medical problems.

Do your own research, Nexium is merely the newest version of Prilosec, a minor change to get a fresh patent. Either are effective for treating acid reflux, not gallbladder disease.

I do place most of the blame on the doctor, but AstraZeneca was humping the hell out of Prilosec at the time and did at the time offer promotions to the doctor for prescribing it. They created a climate where doctors were induced to prescribe it for a variety of gastro problems. The doctor was essentially blind to the true source of my wive's problems, it benefited him to see acid-reflux.

[TC Rider]

Read my post 105.

[The Phantom FReeper]

Again, the Prilosec was being promoted for GERD. If the doctor fails to think "outside of the box," then that's his fault. If you want to blame the manufacturer for the misuse of its product, contrary to its labeling, and persist in believing that the manufacturer wants to use a sort of "Jedi mind trick" to make physicians prescribe their product incorrectly, against all common sense, then that is your fault. Not everyone is capable of rational thought.

[maryz]

Obviously, you aren't aware of how contingent fees work as the case moves through the appeal process?

Depends on the state. In MA, you can't have a higher contingent fee for an appeal.

[TC Rider]

Again, the Prilosec was being promoted for GERD. If the doctor fails to think "outside of the box," then that's his fault. If you want to blame the manufacturer for the misuse of its product, contrary to its labeling, and persist in believing that the manufacturer wants to use a sort of "Jedi mind trick" to make physicians prescribe their product incorrectly, against all common sense, then that is your fault. Not everyone is capable of rational thought.

Let's see, I was there, you weren't. I've worked in and around the pharma industry for years and understand how they promote drugs and how they entice doctors to prescribe them.

Are cash inducements a 'jedi mind trick'? You tell me.

I'm tired of wasting my time on a resurrected thread and I'm also tired of repeating myself for those more 'rational' than I.

I ascribe most of the blame to the doctor. I believe AstraZenaca shares some portion of the blame for creating a climate where doctors want to see GERD in all digestive irregularities.

Now bug off.

[Safetgiver]

you had a colonoscopy for a reason....what was it... because the doctor knew he had insurance, probably.

[Cincinna]

I am so sorry to hear you had such a horrific experience.

I hope it doesn't discourage people from having this life-saving procedure. The success rate without complications is almost 100% done under the proper conditions in a Doctor's office with an expert who has done thousands of them.

[bad company]

Wow, just noticed this happened in 2002!?!

Wow! I guess a drive by poster brought it back to life. Well I learned something anyway.;-)

[krunkygirl]

My brother-in-law had a similar reaction to his colonoscopy.
Ditto the heavy bleeding and his wife got him to the hospital.
The doctor blamed a weakness in his tissue, I think.
My guess, the doctor cut something internally (acidentally, of course, but I still think it was the doctor.)

[Cobra64]

Thanks to all you guys. I've had two sunbsequent colonoscopies since the first disaster, and everything went smoothly.

[Spiff]

Call your attorney now. Also, have this entire post removed from the Internet immediately. It will be used by the truly evil insurance company attorneys against you, to trip you up or to show any kind of tiny inconsistancy with these statements and any future statements made under oath. You should sue such an incompetent doctor to help ensure he doesn't hurt someone else in the future. Don't settle.

[Spiff]

Never mind. I just checked the date on the thread and it is OLD. I guess you didn't sue.

[colorado tanker]

My daughter's coach, a very athletic, vigorous man, recently died of intestinal cancer, leaving a widow and three young kids. He was under 50 and never had a colonoscopy. Less than a year from diagnosis to death.

My colonoscopy was negative, and I'm gonna have one every five years. No way I want to go through that or put my family through it.

[arizonarachel]

Did you join just to answer that question from 02?

[krunkygirl]

Very glad to hear that!

[armydoc]

There's a new procedure in some hospitals that is less invasive. They use a cat-scan of the intestine and abdomen and a 3D reconstruction of the image data. The only "invasive" part are (a) the pre-test purge, and (b) right before the test, they inflate your bowel with air. Supposedly they can see pretty small polyps. It is called colonography.

And it's not ready for "prime time" yet:

CT colonography sensitivity low

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Compared with conventional colonoscopy, the sensitivity of computed tomographic colonography is quite low, even for lesions of at least 10 mm, according to results of a large, multicenter study reported in the April 14th issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association.

Several studies from single centers have suggested a high degree of sensitivity for CT colonography, Dr. Peter B. Cotton, at the Medical University of South Carolina in Charleston, and associates note. (See Reuters Health reports, March 18, 2004 and December 1 2003.) Their own study was designed to evaluate the accuracy of CT colonography in routine practice at nine major hospital centers.

Included were 615 patients referred for clinically indicated elective colonoscopy between 2000 and 2001. Colonoscopy was performed within 2 hours of the colonography.

When using a threshold of 6 mm, the sensitivity was 39% compared with conventional colonoscopy; sensitivity was 55% for lesions of at least 10 mm. CT colonography missed two of eight cancers.

At the one center that had "substantial" prior experience with CT colonography, the sensitivity was 82% for lesions of 6 mm or more. Sensitivity at all of the other centers combined was 24%, with no improvement in accuracy as the number of cases at each center was increased.

Preference questionnaires after both procedures were performed showed that 46% of the participants preferred CT colonography versus 41% who preferred conventional colonoscopy.

"Even if the results of CT colonography continue to be good in the hands of experts, it has yet to be proven that this expertise can be taught and disseminated reliably into daily practice," Dr. Cotton's team concludes.

"The differences between what virtual colonoscopy can do and what it will do if applied in ordinary practice circumstances are so great that physicians must be cautious" in implementing this strategy, Dr. David F. Ransohoff at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill maintains in a JAMA editorial.

JAMA 2004;1713-1719,1772-1774.

http://www.oncolink.upenn.edu/resources/article.cfm?c=3&s=8&ss=23&id=10649&month=04&year=2004


"Anecdote" is not an ideal source to base your healthcare decisions. In five minutes, I found the above objective assessment of CT colonography, and also found the following article citing a 0.2% (2 out of 1000) complication rate for colonoscopy (in an elderly population, yet!):

Colonoscopy in elderly people is a safe procedure with a high diagnostic yield: a prospective comparative study of 2000 patients. Karajeh MA, Sanders DS, Hurlstone DP. Gastroenterology and Liver Unit, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield S10 2JF, South Yorkshire, UK. BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Optical colonoscopy is considered the gold standard for colorectal examination and has the advantage of allowing biopsies and polypectomy. However, the data on its safety and effectiveness in the elderly population are limited and somewhat conflicting. We prospectively assessed whether there are differences in completion rates, diagnostic yield, complication rates and 30-day mortality between patients aged > or = 65 years and patients aged < 65 undergoing colonoscopy at our centre. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data were collected prospectively on 2000 colonoscopies performed over a 2-year period (January 2002 to January 2004). We compared 1000 consecutive colonoscopies in patients aged > or = 65 with 1000 consecutive colonoscopies in patients aged < 65 (control group). Data were collected on sedation; on completion rates, both crude and adjusted to discount failures due to obstructive disease; on diagnostic yield; complications, and on 30-day mortality. RESULTS: The median age was 75 years (51 % women) for the elderly group and 54 years (59 % women) for controls. The proportion of patients who received sedation was similar for both groups (59 % vs. 62 %, P = 0.97) but the mean dose of midazolam was lower in the elderly group (3.8 mg vs. 4.5 mg, P < 0.0001). The crude completion rate was lower for the elderly group (81.8 % vs. 86.5 %, P = 0.004), but the adjusted rate was similar for both groups (88.1 % elderly vs. 87.6 % control, P = 0.18). The overall diagnostic yield was higher in the elderly group (65 % vs. 45 %, P < 0.0001) with higher rates of carcinoma detected (7.1 % vs. 1.3 %, P < 0.0001). The complication rate was low (0.2 % per group). CONCLUSIONS: Colonoscopy in the elderly is safe and effective with a high diagnostic yield. Colonoscopy may now be the imaging modality of choice in the elderly population.