The Condemn of a clinic for not detecting a breast cancer in time

The Contentious Administrative Chamber of the Superior Court of Justice of the Canary Islands (TSJC) has condemned the Canary Islands Health Service to compensate 80,000 euros to a woman for not detecting in time the malignant nature of a tumor in her breast, which caused the breast removal. The ruling is firm. Read more about clinics and doctors in the blog of apsc to avoid these situations.

The First Section of the Contentious-Administrative Chamber of the TSJC has partially upheld the appeal filed by a neighbor of Gran Canaria against the judgment of the first instance that on April 6, 2017, sentenced the SCS to compensate with 60,000 euros, when the only liability of the Administration only for the loss of opportunity. The judicial decision completely rejects the appeal of the health administration.

The Court appreciates not only the loss of opportunity that the Court saw at the time but also the infringement of the lex artist (medical malpractice) in the diagnosis of the pathology that caused the loss of the chest – the appropriate medical treatment was not granted. – and increases the compensation from 60,000 to 80,000 euros, for the moral damages and those derived from the delay of diagnosis.

The patient was 38 years old when she first went to her family doctor, having detected a nodule in her chest, and he sent her to a quick consultation with the corresponding service in 2012. The radiological report warned of the existence of a nodule of 0.6 centimeters, suggestive of “cyst with echogenic content”, recommending a clinical control.

The patient went to the hospital and the only thing that consists of this visit is a clinical note of outpatient consultations in which it is stated that the cyst is “of equal size” and is discharged from his illness “with a physical examination”. After a while, the patient was diagnosed with breast cancer and had to be operated on. He had to undergo an “axillary emptying” and post-surgical lymphedema occurred. The sentence concludes that “if the corresponding diagnostic tests had been performed, the complementary mammography in April or the repeat ultrasound in September, the exact extent of the injury could have been determined”.