Senior Trial Partner Christopher A. Terzian, assisted by Partner Victor M. Ivanoff, secured a unanimous defense verdict in Suffolk County Supreme Court. The plaintiff alleged MCB’s client, a spine surgeon, failed to timely and properly treat a cerebral spinal fluid leak that allegedly occurred after he performed a successful right L4 – L5 decompressive laminectomy on May 15, 2015, to relieve the plaintiff's right lower extremity sciatica. Plaintiff's counsel asked the jury to award his client a total of $6.7 million.
The plaintiff claimed that our client re-operated three weeks later at the wrong spinal level to address a CSF leak. Mr. Terzian and expert witnesses in neuroradiology and neurosurgery demonstrated, using a model of the initial operation and subsequent MRI films, that our client did indeed re-operate at L4– L5, the appropriate level, to investigate the CSF leak. The defense further established that despite not visually confirming a CSF leak during there-operation, our client applied a glue-like substance in and around the dura of the spinal canal at L4 – L5 as a precaution against an undetectable intermittent leak. At the time, there was a collection of presumed CSF, expected postoperative fluid, and a seroma present at L4 – L5.
Several weeks later, our client placed a drain in the plaintiff’s spinal canal at L4 –L5 to reduce CSF pressure, facilitating potential healing and sealing of any dural tear causing intermittent leakage. The drain effectively reduced and stabilized the collection of presumed CSF and seroma, relieving the plaintiff's symptoms for approximately four months. A subsequent MRI in November 2015indicated a slight decrease in the fluid collection at L4 – L5 with no evidence of communication with the spinal canal.
Despite our client's offer for further treatment to explore the recurrence of CSF leak symptoms, the plaintiff declined and sought treatment from pain medicine specialists, neurologists, a chiropractor, an interventional radiologist and ultimately another neurosurgeon over the following months. The defense successfully demonstrated that a subsequent surgery in May 2016 by another neurosurgeon, aimed at repairing a newly diagnosed CSF leak, resulted in the plaintiff developing cauda equina syndrome and arachnoiditis, conditions unrelated to our client's initial care, which ultimately caused the plaintiff's pain and disability.