AN ELDERLY woman died weeks after undergoing kidney surgery that should never have taken place, according to a watchdog’s investigation.
The Scottish Public Services Ombudsman condemned NHS Tayside for “serious failings” in the treatment of the woman, known only as Mrs A, after independent experts found that the decision to remove her right kidney at Ninewells Hospital in Dundee was unreasonable and had triggered “a cascade of medical complications”.
They said there was a “low risk” that Mrs A’s kidney cancer would harm her, but that she was “at exceptionally high risk from kidney surgery” due to her age and history of heart problems, including angina and a heart attack.
READ MORE: Eating Mediterranean diet in old age 'delays onset of frailty'
The SPSO also criticised “a number of failings in Mrs A’s nursing care”, including the management of pressure sores, diabetes and nutrition, and found she had not been prescribed enough hours of pain relief once she was terminally ill.
She died in September 2017, the day after she had been sent home from hospital for end-of-life care.
Her daughter went on to raise a complaint with the SPSO after NHS Tayside’s own internal probe failed to identify any major problems with her mother’s care.
The family’s ordeal began in May 2017 when a routine scan for Mrs A’s heart condition picked up a small lesion on her right kidney, measuring less than two inches.
Doctors diagnosed a renal cell carcinoma, a type of kidney cancer, and she was referred for surgery at Ninewells Hospital in mid-August.
Within days of the operation, Mrs A began experiencing chest pain.
A CT scan showed a build up of blood in her pleural cavity and she underwent treatment with antibiotics and a chest drain, during which time she was transferred three times between coronary care and the respiratory unit.
The SPSO said there had also been an “unreasonable” three-day delay in carrying out tests to detect the problem.
When her condition failed to improve, Mrs A was transferred to Edinburgh for video-assisted thoracic surgery.
However, she subsequently developed ventricular fibrillation, a problem with the heart’s electrical signalling which can cause it to stop pumping blood.
Mrs A was transferred back to Ninewells where her condition deteriorated further and she was diagnosed with a pulmonary oedema, a build up of fluid in the lungs which causes breathing difficulties.
She did not want further medical treatments or investigations and in late September she was discharged from hospital to die at home.
The SPSO report states that previous studies have shown that elderly patients and those with pre-existing conditions who have small kidney lesions “have a low mortality rate from renal cell carcinoma and a high mortality rate from other causes”.
READ MORE: Hip and knee ops cancelled in Ayrshire after surgeon suspended pending assault trial
A urologist consulted independently by the SPSO said the lesion “might not have caused her any harm” but that “Mrs A was at exceptionally high risk from kidney surgery because she was elderly and had significant heart problems”.
The risk of the cancer spreading was probably less than 2% but the SPSO found no evidence that the option of monitoring her condition with scans, instead of surgery, had been discussed with Mrs A.
The SPSO said: “It was inappropriate and unreasonable for the board not to have had these discussion with Mrs A. I am deeply concerned that the board have not recognised the importance of respecting a patient’s right to be fully informed.”
A spokeswoman for NHS Tayside said: “We are sincerely sorry that treatment and care in this case fell below the standard we would expect.
“We accept all the recommendations made in the report and an action plan is being developed to meet the recommendations within the agreed timescales.
“We will be contacting the family again to apologise and offer the opportunity for a meeting with the Clinical Lead for Urology.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel