Published on:

Case questions medical practice involving choice of suture material. Ducasse v. N.Y.C. Health & Hosps. Corp. 2017 N.Y. Slip Op. 1647 (N.Y. App. Div. 2017)


In Ducasse v. N.Y.C. Health & Hosps. Corp., the plaintiff challenged the type of sutures used in her episiotomy. An episiotomy is a surgical incision made in the perineum—the area between the vagina and the anus—to enlarge the vaginal opening during childbirth. This procedure is typically performed to facilitate delivery, especially in cases where the baby needs to be delivered quickly or when there is a risk of severe tearing. The goal of an episiotomy is to prevent irregular, more traumatic tearing of the tissues that might occur during childbirth and to speed the delivery process when necessary.

Background Facts
On November 13, 2011, Atato Ducasse was in labor at Lincoln Hospital. The delivery encountered complications when the baby’s shoulders became stuck after the head had been delivered. Dr. Patrina Phillip, the attending physician, performed an emergency episiotomy to facilitate the birth. While the baby was delivered safely, during this procedure, Ducasse suffered a fourth-degree perineal laceration, leading to significant bleeding. To repair the damage, Dr. Phillip used two types of sutures—vicryl for the rectal mucosa and chromic for the internal and external anal sphincter. Despite the initial success of the procedure, complications followed.

On December 6, Ducasse was examined by a nurse midwife who noted ongoing healing issues and complications related to the perineal laceration. By January 12, 2012, Ducasse had developed a rectovaginal fistula, necessitating four additional surgeries at Montefiore Hospital. Despite these interventions, Ducasse continued to suffer from fecal incontinence. Consequently, on January 31, 2013, Ducasse and her husband filed a medical malpractice lawsuit against Dr. Phillip and other defendants, alleging negligence in the choice of sutures used during the episiotomy and subsequent care.

Whether the use of chromic instead of vicryl sutures during the episiotomy contributed to the complications suffered by Ducasse, including the development of a rectovaginal fistula and ongoing fecal incontinence.

The Supreme Court, Bronx County, initially granted a summary judgment in favor of the defendants, which was subsequently affirmed by the appellate division. The court found that the defendants successfully demonstrated that their medical practices, including the choice of sutures, adhered to accepted standards and that any deviation did not cause the plaintiff’s injuries.

The defendants provided evidence through an expert’s opinion that the use of chromic sutures was within the accepted standard of medical practice and that these sutures did not cause Ducasse’s injuries. The court emphasized that the plaintiff needed to rebut this evidence with medical proof of a deviation from standard care and its direct link to the injuries claimed. The plaintiff’s counter-arguments and expert testimony failed to conclusively demonstrate that the choice of sutures was the proximate cause of the complications. Particularly, the expert did not adequately address how the suture material choice directly led to the development of the fistula and incontinence, nor did they convincingly argue that vicryl sutures would have prevented these outcomes.

In medical malpractice cases, establishing medical proof of a deviation from standard care and its direct link to the injuries claimed is crucial for accountability and justice. This proof is essential to demonstrate that the healthcare provider’s actions fell below the accepted medical standards, directly causing harm to the patient. Without this link, plaintiffs cannot hold providers legally responsible for their suffering or claim compensation for damages incurred. Establishing these elements ensures that victims receive redress for their grievances and promotes higher standards of medical practice, ultimately safeguarding patient safety and enhancing trust in healthcare systems.

This case underscores the complexity of medical malpractice claims, especially those involving detailed aspects of surgical practice like the choice of suture material. If you or a loved one has suffered due to potential medical negligence during childbirth or any surgical procedure, seek the expertise of a seasoned New York birth injury lawyer. Engaging a knowledgeable lawyer promptly can significantly influence the outcome of your case, ensuring that all legal avenues for redress are thoroughly explored and executed.

Contact Information