A woman in her 50s who had part of her lung removed unnecessarily after doctors misdiagnosed her with lung cancer has received a six-figure compensation settlement.
Following surgery to remove part of the lung where cancer was suspected, investigations found she actually had pneumonia, meaning the surgery had been unnecessary.
The surgery has exacerbated her respiratory problems and caused significant psychological impact.
The claimant ‘C’ sought the help of specialist medical solicitor, Miriam Bi, to make a lung cancer medical negligence claim against the two NHS trusts responsible for her care.
Case summary
In June 2019, C, a non-smoker with a history of asthma, underwent a chest X-ray which confirmed that her lungs were clear.
Several months later, she visited her GP complaining of shortness of breath and was prescribed a short course of steroids.
In July 2020, C woke up experiencing pain when breathing. Although she had no cough or sputum, her GP was concerned about the possibility of a pulmonary embolism due to a previous history of deep vein thrombosis in pregnancy.
She was referred to the emergency department for further investigation. A CT pulmonary angiogram was carried out, which unexpectedly suggested the presence of a possible lung tumour.
Further imaging was arranged. A CT scan of the abdomen and pelvis identified a 46 mm mass in the lower lobe of her right lung, raising strong suspicion of a primary lung cancer.
Within days, C was referred to respiratory specialists. Following review at a lung multidisciplinary team meeting, doctors told her that the findings were highly suspicious for lung cancer. She was informed that the disease might still be at an early stage and that treatment with curative intent could be possible.
Additional investigations followed, including a PET scan and lung function testing. The PET scan suggested a presumed bronchogenic carcinoma with involvement of nearby lymph nodes. An MRI scan was also arranged to check for spread to the spine, but this showed no evidence of metastatic disease.
Based on the available imaging, clinicians believed that C had lung cancer which had potentially spread to nearby lymph nodes but had not metastasised further.
C was referred to a specialist thoracic surgeon to discuss treatment options. Although she had never smoked and her lung function was normal, surgery was offered as a potential curative treatment. During the consultation, the options of oncological or surgical management were discussed. Believing she had cancer and wishing to pursue the best chance of recovery, C agreed to undergo surgery.
In September 2020, she underwent a video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) lower lobectomy together with removal of lymph nodes in the chest. The operation was performed with the intention of diagnosing, staging and treating the suspected cancer. She was discharged from hospital a few days later.
Two weeks after the surgery, C was informed that the pathology results showed she did not have cancer at all. Instead, the abnormality in her lung was likely due to pneumonia and scarring. As a result, she had undergone major lung surgery unnecessarily.
After being told she had cancer and undergoing invasive surgery, C developed an adjustment disorder with anxiety when she later learned that the diagnosis had been incorrect.
Litigation
A claim was brought alleging negligence in the diagnosis and management of the suspected lung cancer. Liability was denied before formal proceedings began.
However, after the claim was issued and legal documents were served, the defendant chose to settle the case without filing a defence.
