St Vincent’s University Hospital has expressed regret to the family of a woman who died weeks after a transplant operation.
Karen Mitchell, of Dromahane, Mallow, Co Cork, was 32 when she died at the Dublin hospital five years ago. She had been admitted for a pancreas and kidney transplant, but, it was claimed, she developed a leak complication and sepsis. She died on April 22nd, 2018, at St Vincent’s.
In a letter read to the High Court, St Vincent’s University Hospital stated to the Mitchell family that it wished to express “our regret for the care afforded to your much-loved daughter and sister Karen whilst in our hospital which, we acknowledge, culminated in her untimely death”.
It added: “We offer our sincere and deepest sympathy to you for her loss and for the grief and continuing sadness that her death has caused to your family.”
Secret Teacher: Too many school leaders bow to parent power. They bend the knee or rarely back their staff
Oscars 2025: Was Adrien Brody’s speech the longest ever, was Conan O’Brien funny and eight other key questions
Pancake Tuesday: The only recipe you need for making an easy, better batter
‘Where I come from, people don’t do medicine. It’s not on your radar’: how a new generation of doctors is being trained
Eugene Gleeson SC, for the Mitchells, told the court the case had been settled on confidential terms.
Karen’s brother Brian Mitchell, of Ballsbridge, Dublin, had on behalf of his family, including his father, Declan Mitchell, of Dublin Hill, Cork, sued St Vincent’s Healthcare Group over the death of Karen at St Vincent’s.
Ms Mitchell had a simultaneous pancreas and kidney transplant. It was claimed that her condition intensified leading to her death. Following a postmortem, it was claimed, Ms Mitchell’s cause of death was determined to be inflammatory response syndrome with sepsis due to an anastomotic leak.
It was claimed in the proceedings that there was a failure to consider the possibility of an anastomotic leak on April 7th, 2018 after a CT scan. It was further claimed there was a failure to draw alleged appropriate inference from the CT examination of the abdomen and pelvis on April 20th.
There was, it was further alleged, a failure to consider the possibility of obstruction of the anastomotic site and an alleged failure to aggressively manage the woman’s condition.
All the claims were denied.
Ms Justice Leonie Reynolds noted the settlement.
