£34,500 Win for 34-year-old Woman's Ectopic Pregnancy

Before the claimant (C)’s ectopic pregnancy, she already had one child but had also suffered two miscarriages in the past. During an early pregnancy scan, nothing could be seen other than a small ovarian cyst C was reassured that that was normal in early pregnancy. Her pregnancy blood levels (BHCG) was reported to be reassuring for a normal pregnancy. Further blood results 3 days later also appeared reassuring. 

However, 2 further days, another scan still did not reveal any pregnancy within the womb and C was admitted for 3 days, during which time there were various investigations, she was advised there was no intrauterine pregnancy and she was discharged home. 

 The next day C collapsed and needed urgent resuscitation to save her life. She was suffering from severe pain to her lower abdomen, nausea and vomiting. She was haemodynamically unstable and had to be stabilised in an emergency admission to hospital. The day after admission, she underwent a diagnostic laparoscopy (keyhole surgery) which unfortunately had to be converted to an open procedure (called a laparotomy). It was discovered that her left fallopian tube had ruptured due to an ectopic pregnancy. Therefore, the left fallopian tube and ovary had to be removed (this is called a left salpingo-oopherectomy). 

C brought a claim alleging that it was negligent in failing to diagnose and treat the ectopic pregnancy earlier. She also alleged that if the pregnancy had been diagnosed promptly, it would have been treatable using Methotrexate, and so she would not have had to lose her ovary and fallopian tube. 

Liability was neither admitted nor disputed 

C was left with severe abdominal scarring. She stayed in hospital for two weeks after surgery. She was very weak and needed catheterisation and a blood transfusion. She suffered with feeling sick and being sick for a few days after removal of her catheter. Her recovery was slow and for eight weeks after the operation she needed care and help with domestic tasks. C was also unable to care for her child, aged 8 at the time. 

The operation had a significant impact on C psychologically. Her sleeping pattern was significantly disturbed for a year and developed an anxiety disorder with extensive anxiety and worry affecting her family life and relationships. Happily, she fell pregnant again in June 2011 but she experienced anxiety throughout her pregnancy, as well as continuing to experience flashbacks. 

This was clearly a very unpleasant case and we think it would have attracted a higher award of compensation if the hospital trust had admitted liability. Clearly the settlement was discounted for litigation risks of having to go to trial a settlement was not reached. In addition, the settlement would have been higher had the claimant’s future fertility been adversely affected but she did fall pregnant again naturally.