Six-figure settlement for patient following delayed diagnosis of complex neuro-spinal injuries

 Chris had been born with a sacral appendage. This is a physical anomaly often linked to an underlying congenital spinal issue such as spina bifida.  

 

The appendage was removed shortly after birth, but no MRI scan was carried out to investigate potential deeper spinal abnormalities. Chris was discharged and no further action was taken at the time. 

 

Chris appeared to develop relatively normally as a child, but, during his adolescence, he began experiencing right foot and leg weakness. He saw a neurologist privately, who suspected a peripheral nerve issue. Neurophysiological testing appeared to support this diagnosis, but a physiotherapy examination revealed findings inconsistent with this suspected diagnosis.  

 

Chris was discharged with instructions to continue with physiotherapy exercises, but these did not help, and he continued to experience leg weakness and muscle wastage. 

 

Over the following years, Chris’s condition deteriorated. In particular, he developed serious bladder dysfunction. This was investigated, but the underlying cause was not determined, and Chris was told that nothing could be done about it. 

 

In his mid-20s and with his symptoms continuing to worsen, now including bowel dysfunction, Chris decided to seek a further opinion on his condition. For the first time, an MRI scan was arranged, which showed a sacral lipoma – a growth at the base of the spine – which was tethered to the spinal cord. This had likely been present from birth and had been gradually causing tension and stretching, leading to the deterioration in Chris’s symptoms over the years. 

 

Neurosurgery was undertaken to untether the cord and prevent further deterioration. However, the damage already sustained was irreversible, leaving Chris with permanent symptoms, including a severely damaged bladder requiring daily self-catheterisation. 

 

In 2019, Chris instructed specialist medical lawyers at Leigh Day to investigate a potential claim for negligence against multiple potential defendants. Investigations were complicated by the length of time since the events took place, with many significant medical records having been destroyed. However, Chris’s parents had, crucially, kept documentation of their own of his sacral appendage at birth. The investigation also benefitted from the assistance of highly experienced medical experts in paediatric neurosurgery and neurology. 

 

Following detailed investigations, three defendants were identified: the hospital where the sacral appendage was originally removed, the private neurologist, and the private neurophysiologist.  

 

Allegations included failure to conduct appropriate imaging in infancy, misdiagnosis during adolescence, and inadequate neurophysiological testing. Had any of these factors been avoided, Chris would have undergone surgical intervention much sooner and his medical outcome would have been greatly improved. 

 

The hospital, private neurologist, and the private neurophysiologist all denied liability but agreed to explore resolution of the claim outside of court.  

 

Further investigations were carried out as to the extent of Chris’s injuries, along with his future prognosis and the likely financial impact. A settlement meeting took place with all three defendants simultaneously, and offers of settlement were exchanged but not agreed.  

 

Settlement discussions continued to take place with the defendants separately, and the claims against the defendants settled for a six-figure sum over the following weeks. 

 

Michael Roberts, senior associate solicitor at Leigh Day, who acted for Chris on this claim, said:  

 

“Chris’s unusual case highlights the challenges involved with proving historic allegations of medical negligence. Despite a number of obstacles and delays, Chris remained calm and patient throughout the process and ultimately secured a good outcome for himself. 

 

The case underscores the importance of early and thorough investigation of congenital anomalies and persistent neurological symptoms, as well as the need for coordinated responses from healthcare providers when faced with serious allegations.” 

 

Leigh Day worked with barrister Mr Richard Smith of One Crown Office Row chambers.