New York, NY personal injury attorney Michael Ronemus talks about tells us about the Sloan Kettering medical malpractice case where a retractor was left in the patient. He recounts a recent case involving a client who had been battling pancreatic cancer. The client had responded well to treatment, and his medical team determined he was in sufficiently good condition to undergo a partial pancreatectomy—a surgical procedure used to address pancreatic cancer. The operation was completed successfully, and the medical team informed the family that everything had gone well.

Following the surgery, an X-ray revealed the presence of a retractor near the client on the operating table. However, the instrument was inadvertently left inside his body. Standard surgical protocol requires a count of all instruments to ensure nothing remains inside the patient, but in this instance, either the count was not conducted properly or was inaccurate. Despite the X-ray evidence, the retained instrument was not identified.

After discharge, the client experienced significant abdominal pain. He returned to the hospital for a follow-up exploratory procedure, yet the retained retractor remained undetected. The client then returned home to North Carolina, continuing to experience severe discomfort and complications. Two months after the initial surgery, he returned to New York for a third operation, during which the retractor was finally discovered. Unfortunately, by that time, it had migrated into his intestine, causing a widespread infection (sepsis) that ultimately led to his death approximately one month later.

The client was in his early 60s, actively working, and survived by a spouse, four children, and several grandchildren. His family, many of whom are medical professionals, had trusted the hospital to provide safe care. The outcome was a profound tragedy.

The firm has filed a lawsuit in connection with this case. The hospital’s legal team has approached them regarding an early settlement, acknowledging that the case presents clear evidence of malpractice. The focus now is on determining whether to resolve the matter promptly or proceed with full litigation, depending on the settlement offer and the family’s preferences.