Facts

On Feb. 23, 2005, plaintiff Anthony Guzman, 38, presented to defendant Bill J. Kim, M.D. for progressive pain in the right wrist and right hand area, which had become constant and was impacting plaintiff's ability to perform his occupational duties as a lighting technician for the motion picture industry. Dr. Kim diagnosed plaintiff as having right distal radioulnar degenerative joint disease and a possible neuroma of the dorsal area of the right hand. On March 31, 2005, Dr. Kim, performed a "Suave Kapanji" procedure for the degenerative disease of the right distal radioulnar joint. A neuroma was also located in the dorsum area of the right hand and removed.

The Suave Kapanji procedure involves placing pins through the radioulnar joint and excising a portion of the ulna. In performing surgery, the operating surgeon has several important objectives. First, he needs to leave a sufficient amount of bone stock at the distal radioulnar joint (to avoid any shattering of bone during pin placement), maintain an adequate gap of bone between the distal radioulnar joint and the remaining ulna, and maintain a reasonable length for the distal ulnar stump. The surgery proceeded forward without incident. Plaintiff continued to treat with Dr. Kim through Oct. 7, 2005.

During plaintiff's post-operative treatment with Dr. Kim, he developed an infection at the fusion site, which resolved. However, plaintiff developed a nonfusion. He also developed alleged pain in his right hand and wrist (which exceeded his pre-operative pain in these areas), and alleged pain in right forearm area following his surgery by Dr. Kim. The plaintiff also claimed that he had evidence of the distal ulna poking through the skin during his treatment with Dr. Kim.

The plaintiff left Dr. Kim's treatment and began treating with hand surgeon David Auerbach, M.D. in October 2005. Dr. Auerbach diagnosed plaintiff as having an unstable distal ulna. On Nov. 18, 2005, Dr. Auerbach performed the following surgical procedures on plaintiff including right distal ulnar excision and stabilization; stabilization with tendon transfer, right distal ulna, with split extensor carpi ulnaris and splint flexor carpi ulnaris tendons; scar revision; redo of the right hand dorsal neuroma excision and implantation into the bone at the 4th metacarpal base. Unfortunately, Dr. Auerbach's surgery failed to stabilize the distal ulna. As such, plaintiff underwent further surgery by Dr. Auerbach, which involved a right wrist distal radioulnar joint arthroplasty, i.e. the placement of hardware.

Although plaintiff's distal ulna instability was resolved, plaintiff claimed that he experienced significant and permanent reduction in right forearm rotation due to the necessary hardware insertion, as well as continuing pain in his right wrist and hand area.

PLAINTIFF'S CONTENTIONS:
The plaintiff alleged that Dr. Kim negligently performed the Suave Kapanji procedure by removing an excessive amount of the ulna resulting in distal ulna instability and the need for further surgery resulting in permanent loss of right forearm rotation coupled with permanent pain and disability of the right wrist/hand area.

DEFENDANT'S CONTENTIONS:
The defendant claimed that his care and treatment complied with the standard of care and that the distal ulna instability is a recognized complication associated with the performance of the Suave Kapanji procedure. The defendant claimed that there was not an excessive amount of ulna removed during the surgery and that even where less ulna is excised, distal ulna instability can result.

Damages

The plaintiff claimed $137,665 in past lost earnings; $591,322 in future lost earnings; $2,700 cost of vocational retraining; $4,500 for health insurance; $174,026 lost pension benefits.

Injuries

The plaintiff alleged that due to the failed Suave Kapanji procedure and the need for further surgery, he developed permanent restrictions in right forearm rotation as well as pain in his right wrist and hand area. The plaintiff claimed that because of his injuries, he could not return to work as a lighting technician in the motion picture industry, which involves heavy lifting and carrying. The plaintiff alleged that his employment opportunities were limited due to the fact that he did not finish high school.

Result

Jury verdict in favor of defendant.

Other Information

Motion for new trial was denied. FILING DATE: Nov. 21, 2006.

Deliberation

one day

Poll

9-3 (no negligence)