Doctor fined Rs 1 lakh on heterotopic pregnancy after IVF
Hyderabad:Rs 1 Lakh compensation has been awarded by the Khammam District Consumer Forum as compensation to a patient stating mismanagement and medical negligence in management of the patient after IVF that led to her developing a heterotopic pregnancy (where one foetus develops in the fallopian tube and another in the uterus.)
The case is that of a patient who had approached Dr. Muvva Lakshmi Rajeshwari of Rohit Test Tube Baby Centre. On 13/10/2007, she was impregnated using IVF technique, with her pregnancy being confirmed on 02-11-2007. On the advice of the doctor, on 16/11/2007, she underwent her first ultrasound, with a repeat ultrasound done on 02-12-2007. The patient was informed that her baby was normal and suggested by the doctor to take same medicines as prescribed earlier and also suggested to attend the treatment again after two weeks
On 12/12/2007, the patient became sick and was rushed to the said centre in a 108 ambulance. At the center she was referred to any emergency hospital ans she was rushed to Mamata Hospital. The doctors at Mamata Hospital found that the complainant had ectopic pregnancy, one fetus was developed in the fallopian tube and another one in the uterus, due to rupture of fallopian tube, the complainant suffered from bleeding and due to which, the condition of complainant was became very serious. The doctors at Mamata Hospital conducted surgery at early hours of 13-12-2007 after taking consent from the husband of complainant.
The complainant further submitted that during the course of treatment at Mamata General Hospital i.e. after one week of joining as inpatient, the doctors found that the fetus in the uterus was also dead. The complainant was discharged on 02-01-2008.
The complainant stated that she had spent Rs 1.7 lakh on IVF treatment and Rs 25,000 for bills at Mamata Hospital and Rs 30,000 over transportation and other charges. Rohit Test Tube Centre argued before the Forum that the scan report did not reveal that the complainant had a heterotrophic pregnancy, which is very rare, and they were not to blame. The complainant thus claimed Rs.10,000,00/- towards damages together with interest @12% per annum by filing the present complaint.
The complainant further added that despite she undergoing ultrasound at the centre, reports as well as prescriptions could not submitted to the court, as the centre/doctor had not provided her with the same
In its defence, the doctor and the centrefiled counter by denying the averments of complaint and by submitting that it had given treatment to the complainant with all care and caution by providing professional skill, due to which only, the complainant had conceived and continued the pregnancy for such a long time. The opposite party had given treatment basing on the test reports of Sneha Diagnostics. The earlier scan report did not reveal that the pregnancy in fallopian tube and uterus, in fact, this type of pregnancy is called as Heterotophic pregnancy, which is very rare. The several factors increases rising ectopic pregnancy in cases of who obtained IVF treatment and can’t identified the gestational sack 100% by Ultra Sonogram. Further the centre submitted that a live extra uterine foetus has been detected by EVS approximately 17 to 28% in cases of ectopic pregnancy, these type of risks are to be assessed basing on the problems allegedly faced by the complainant.
Noting the absence of ultrasound reports as well as the fact that the hospital did not give any treatment to the patient in an emergecy, the court stated that this clearly speaks the negligence of opposite party, so, it is a clear case of ‘Res Ipsa loquitur. Quoting medical literature, it noted that the heterotrophic pregnancy is common in case of IVF and diagnosis of the pregnancy is made during the first trimester (up to 12 weeks) by using endo vaginal 2 – dimensional ultra sound (2DUS) and through MRI pelvis. T
Based on the evidence submitted the court held the doctor negligent directing her to pay Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) to the complainant towards compensation for loss of pregnancy and for causing mental agony within one month from the date of receipt of this order, failing which, the amount shall carry interest @9% per annum till its realization
You can read the full judgement below
The case is that of a patient who had approached Dr. Muvva Lakshmi Rajeshwari of Rohit Test Tube Baby Centre. On 13/10/2007, she was impregnated using IVF technique, with her pregnancy being confirmed on 02-11-2007. On the advice of the doctor, on 16/11/2007, she underwent her first ultrasound, with a repeat ultrasound done on 02-12-2007. The patient was informed that her baby was normal and suggested by the doctor to take same medicines as prescribed earlier and also suggested to attend the treatment again after two weeks
On 12/12/2007, the patient became sick and was rushed to the said centre in a 108 ambulance. At the center she was referred to any emergency hospital ans she was rushed to Mamata Hospital. The doctors at Mamata Hospital found that the complainant had ectopic pregnancy, one fetus was developed in the fallopian tube and another one in the uterus, due to rupture of fallopian tube, the complainant suffered from bleeding and due to which, the condition of complainant was became very serious. The doctors at Mamata Hospital conducted surgery at early hours of 13-12-2007 after taking consent from the husband of complainant.
The complainant further submitted that during the course of treatment at Mamata General Hospital i.e. after one week of joining as inpatient, the doctors found that the fetus in the uterus was also dead. The complainant was discharged on 02-01-2008.
The complainant stated that she had spent Rs 1.7 lakh on IVF treatment and Rs 25,000 for bills at Mamata Hospital and Rs 30,000 over transportation and other charges. Rohit Test Tube Centre argued before the Forum that the scan report did not reveal that the complainant had a heterotrophic pregnancy, which is very rare, and they were not to blame. The complainant thus claimed Rs.10,000,00/- towards damages together with interest @12% per annum by filing the present complaint.
The complainant further added that despite she undergoing ultrasound at the centre, reports as well as prescriptions could not submitted to the court, as the centre/doctor had not provided her with the same
In its defence, the doctor and the centrefiled counter by denying the averments of complaint and by submitting that it had given treatment to the complainant with all care and caution by providing professional skill, due to which only, the complainant had conceived and continued the pregnancy for such a long time. The opposite party had given treatment basing on the test reports of Sneha Diagnostics. The earlier scan report did not reveal that the pregnancy in fallopian tube and uterus, in fact, this type of pregnancy is called as Heterotophic pregnancy, which is very rare. The several factors increases rising ectopic pregnancy in cases of who obtained IVF treatment and can’t identified the gestational sack 100% by Ultra Sonogram. Further the centre submitted that a live extra uterine foetus has been detected by EVS approximately 17 to 28% in cases of ectopic pregnancy, these type of risks are to be assessed basing on the problems allegedly faced by the complainant.
Noting the absence of ultrasound reports as well as the fact that the hospital did not give any treatment to the patient in an emergecy, the court stated that this clearly speaks the negligence of opposite party, so, it is a clear case of ‘Res Ipsa loquitur. Quoting medical literature, it noted that the heterotrophic pregnancy is common in case of IVF and diagnosis of the pregnancy is made during the first trimester (up to 12 weeks) by using endo vaginal 2 – dimensional ultra sound (2DUS) and through MRI pelvis. T
he opposite party failed to clarify whether she had preferred / conducted 2DUS and MRI pelvis prior to rupture of ectopic pregnancy. Even she did not place any documentary evidence in this regard except filing of counter.
Based on the evidence submitted the court held the doctor negligent directing her to pay Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) to the complainant towards compensation for loss of pregnancy and for causing mental agony within one month from the date of receipt of this order, failing which, the amount shall carry interest @9% per annum till its realization
You can read the full judgement below
Next Story