Sommers Schwartz attorney Dina Zalewski filed a medical malpractice lawsuit for a pipefitter whose life was permanently altered after two radiologists failed to identify a dangerous blood clot in a major abdominal artery on two separate imaging studies performed weeks apart at a Detroit-area hospital.
In May 2023, the plaintiff went to the emergency room reporting sudden, severe abdominal pain, nausea, and diarrhea. Doctors ordered a CT scan of his abdomen and pelvis. The radiologist who reviewed the scan noted gastric dilation and a liver condition but did not report a thrombus (blood clot) in the superior mesenteric artery (SMA), the major vessel that supplies most of the small intestine. Without that finding, the care team had no basis to pursue vascular intervention. The plaintiff was treated for other conditions, observed for several days, and eventually discharged home with instructions to follow up with his primary care physician.
Two weeks later, still experiencing abdominal pain, distention, and discomfort with eating, the plaintiff was referred for a CT enterography, a specialized CT designed to evaluate the small bowel. A second radiologist reviewed this new imaging alongside the original May scan. Once again, the SMA thrombus went unreported. The second radiologist also failed to flag the discrepancy between the two studies or contact the ordering physician to alert them that the earlier scan had missed a critical finding. The plaintiff continued without a diagnosis or any treatment for the clot.
By late June 2023, over five weeks after his initial emergency room visit, the plaintiff presented to the emergency department at University of Michigan Hospital with ongoing abdominal pain. A CT scan there identified an SMA thrombus, and further imaging confirmed that the artery was fully occluded with no blood flow through the ileocolic artery. A vascular surgeon who reviewed the plaintiff’s earlier imaging confirmed that the clot had been visible since the May 21 scan, meaning it had gone undetected and untreated for five weeks.
Had either radiologist correctly identified the SMA thrombus when it was first visible or when it appeared again on the June scan, the plaintiff could have received timely vascular intervention. Treatment options at that stage would have included clot-dissolving therapy (thrombolysis), open thrombectomy (surgical removal of the clot), or bypass surgery. With timely care, the plaintiff would likely have had an excellent outcome and returned to normal life. Instead, because the diagnosis was delayed past the window for safe intervention, the vascular surgeon determined that neither clot-lysis nor surgical bypass was viable. The plaintiff was placed on a course of total parenteral nutrition (TPN) intravenous feeding combined with anticoagulation therapy and discharged to home care.
The consequences have been severe and lasting. The plaintiff remained on TPN for seven months and required major bypass surgery in November 2023 to address a chronic stricture in the small bowel that developed as a direct result of the untreated arterial blockage. He continues to suffer daily abdominal pain and must follow a strict high-fiber diet while avoiding foods he once ate without restriction, supplementing with multiple protein drinks each day. He requires ongoing care from specialists in hematology, vascular surgery, and psychology, and will require lifelong anticoagulation therapy.
The plaintiff’s treating surgeon has said more surgery is probably needed, and a further stricture has been described as potentially catastrophic. The plaintiff could not return to work for nearly nine months and was ultimately forced to change jobs because of his physical limitations. He has also experienced depression related to his condition and the ongoing burden his illness has placed on his family.
Our attorneys have been featured on local and national media outlets, including:
