pneumo thorax

[saundra007]

What is the name of your state? Ky.
I was sick for about three months went to the hospital in georgia while visiting a friend they found nothing. Came home to Ky and kept going to the doctors and emergency rooms 3-4 times. They said i had a heart attack by taking a EKG in the ER room, my family doc put me on heart meds after he did a EKG in his office and said I did have a heart attack. Weeks later I ended up back in the hospital and they admitted me and did a heart cath, it came back normal. They send me home saying not much of anything. Two weeks later I had a phuenmo thorax, blew a hole in my lung as my lung was deflated also, I almost died, I was rushed by 911 to the nearest Hospital and they inserted a chest tube. They stablized me until the next morning and I was sent to a hospital in another city to have lung surgery. I did have surgery and the surgeron cut and repaied the hole, I am in the process of healing it has ben 7 weeks, doc said it would take me 6 months to really heal correctly. And I only have 48% lung capacity now.

During this time going back and forth to the ER rooms and seeing the doctor's they did about 3-4 images of my lungs. No one ever said I had infection in my lungs, but the surgeron said i had phuemona ( not spelled right ).... and that is why my lung blew a hole and was badly infected. Question>> Is this malpractic? I live alone and I cannot work and I am damaged for the rest of my life. The ER room doc is the one who said I had a heart attack then that is why I went to see my family doc. he confirmed it too??? but I didnt have a heart attack. Weird huh?

Hurting in Ky.

Can anyone advise

 

[rmet4nzkx]

You could have developed the infection between the last hospital visit and the diagnosis of a pneumo thorax, if you had one sooner it would have shown.

Have you applied for disability or started a cardiac rehab program?

Do you smoke? If so STOP! If not stay away from those who do and tobacco fields there in KY. Eat healthy.

 

[ashkyla]

I had walking pneumonia two years ago, so not the same situation, but similar, and can tell you from experience that pneumonia can cause abnormalities in heart rhythm (due to irregular or low oxygenation of your blood, which stresses your heart) which might look like a heart attack if someone isn't open to other options.

Honestly, they should've done blood tests while treating you for the heart attack, just to be on the safe side.

I'm not sure if it qualifies as malpractice, but it'd probably a safe bet that you could sue for negligence if that's what you choose to do.

 

[ellencee]

What is the name of your state? Ky.
I was sick for about three months went to the hospital in georgia while visiting a friend they found nothing. Came home to Ky and kept going to the doctors and emergency rooms 3-4 times. They said i had a heart attack by taking a EKG in the ER room, my family doc put me on heart meds after he did a EKG in his office and said I did have a heart attack. Weeks later I ended up back in the hospital and they admitted me and did a heart cath, it came back normal. They send me home saying not much of anything. Two weeks later I had a phuenmo thorax, blew a hole in my lung as my lung was deflated also, I almost died, I was rushed by 911 to the nearest Hospital and they inserted a chest tube. They stablized me until the next morning and I was sent to a hospital in another city to have lung surgery. I did have surgery and the surgeron cut and repaied the hole, I am in the process of healing it has ben 7 weeks, doc said it would take me 6 months to really heal correctly. And I only have 48% lung capacity now.

During this time going back and forth to the ER rooms and seeing the doctor's they did about 3-4 images of my lungs. No one ever said I had infection in my lungs, but the surgeron said i had phuemona ( not spelled right ).... and that is why my lung blew a hole and was badly infected. Question>> Is this malpractic? I live alone and I cannot work and I am damaged for the rest of my life. The ER room doc is the one who said I had a heart attack then that is why I went to see my family doc. he confirmed it too??? but I didnt have a heart attack. Weird huh?

Hurting in Ky.

Can anyone advise

It's impossible to answer regarding a "phuemona" that is badly infected as I have no idea of what you are speaking. Pneumo means "air" and refers to the lungs. Additionally, I have no idea why you think you did not have a heart attack when the EKGs apparently confirmed that you either had a heart attack in the past without knowing it or you had a recent/ongoing heart attack or were showing signs of an impending heart attack with probably coronary artery causation, thus the heart cath.

One of the most common complications of a heart cath is a pneumothorax. It is possible that you developed a hole in your lung during the heart cath procedure and it was so small that you were asymptomatic--however, and this is a big 'however'--it is routine and standard procedure for a chest
x-ray to be obtained after a heart cath and the purpose of the x-ray is to look for a pneumothorax. If you suffered a pneumothorax as a result of the heartcath, it should be visible on the x-ray. If it was visible and you did not receive treatment for the pneumothorax, then an act of negligence did occur.

If an act of negligence did occur, as described above, do you then have a valid claim of medical malpractice? Probably not. You would have required hospitalization and treatment, possibly with a chest tube insertion, and most definitely with the potential to develop an infection and/or pneumonia.

There is no guarantee that your lung would have healed without surgical intervention. Much depends on your lung's compliance (ability to stretch and return to relaxed state). Apparently, your lung was not very compliant and either the original pneumothorax got bigger or incompletely healed and then 'blew' making the hole larger or your lung 'blew' a completely separate hole, which is not uncommon in treatment of a pneumothorax.

Having 48% lung function is a moot statement unless you have a comparative % from before the heart cath and the pneumothorax. It is not uncommon for a patient to actually have improved lung function after a pneumothorax and/or lung surgery. How could you defend against such an assertion without evidence of your lungs % before any procedure? You can't.

I don't know why you think you did not have a heart attack. You have stated nothing that disproves the diagnosis of a heart attack. I hope you have not stopped your medications that were ordered to prevent further heart attacks.

FYI--heart attacks are not diagnosed by the heart's rhythm. An EKG, or ECG, reveals much more than the heart's rhythm. I can 'read' an EKG and tell you whether or not the changes are new or old, which portion of the heart or its lining or its tissues are affected, which coronary artery is involved (if a coronary artery is involved), and how your heart is positioned in your chest, and whether or not you need a heart cath STAT, later, or at all. If I can do that with an EKG, no doubt a cardiologist can do the same. As a beloved poster once said, "it doesn't take a rocket surgeon".

I hope the information helps you in determining what actually occurred.
EC

 

[shell007]

One can also have a spontaneus pneumothorax!

Spontaneous pneumothorax is a sudden collection of air or gas in the chest that causes the lung to collapse in the absence of a traumatic injury to the chest or lung. Usually, a distinction is made between a spontaneous (pri****) pneumothorax, and secondary (complicated) pneumothorax.

SPONTANEOUS (PRI M A R Y) PNEUMOTHORAX

Spontaneous pneumothorax occurs in individuals with no known lung disease. It affects close to 9,000 persons in the United States each year- most often among tall, thin men between 20 and 40 years old. The cause of this type of pneumothorax is the rupture of a bleb or cyst in the lung.

Symptoms include:

Chest pain on affected side
Dyspnea (shortness of breath)
Cough
Abnormal breathing movement
Rapid respiratory rate
Spontaneous pneumothorax is diagnosed by chest radiographs.

The way the condition is treated is dependant on its size and course. The objective of treatment is to remove the air from the pleural space, allowing the lung to reexpand. A small pneumothorax will resolve on its own in 1 to 2 weeks. Larger pneumothoraxes require either needle aspiration or a chest tube. Hospitalization is required for chest tube management as the reexpansion of the lung may take several days with the chest tube left in place. Surgery may be performed for a repeated episode to prevent recurrence.

 

[ellencee]

One can also have a spontaneus pneumothorax!

Spontaneous pneumothorax is a sudden collection of air or gas in the chest that causes the lung to collapse in the absence of a traumatic injury to the chest or lung. Usually, a distinction is made between a spontaneous (pri****) pneumothorax, and secondary (complicated) pneumothorax.

SPONTANEOUS (PRI M A R Y) PNEUMOTHORAX

Spontaneous pneumothorax occurs in individuals with no known lung disease. It affects close to 9,000 persons in the United States each year- most often among tall, thin men between 20 and 40 years old. The cause of this type of pneumothorax is the rupture of a bleb or cyst in the lung.

Symptoms include:

Chest pain on affected side
Dyspnea (shortness of breath)
Cough
Abnormal breathing movement
Rapid respiratory rate
Spontaneous pneumothorax is diagnosed by chest radiographs.

The way the condition is treated is dependant on its size and course. The objective of treatment is to remove the air from the pleural space, allowing the lung to reexpand. A small pneumothorax will resolve on its own in 1 to 2 weeks. Larger pneumothoraxes require either needle aspiration or a chest tube. Hospitalization is required for chest tube management as the reexpansion of the lung may take several days with the chest tube left in place. Surgery may be performed for a repeated episode to prevent recurrence.

Thank you for another remarkable post.
EC

 

[shell007]

Thank you for another remarkable post.
EC

What was that for?????

I was merely giving the OP additional information in an effort to maybe help him to try and figure some of this out, or just simply to get a clearer understanding re: his medical condition(s)! It never hurts to be well informed to get a better understanding of something that someone is not overly familiar with.

If he had all the answers...he wouldn't be on this site posting a question and looking for information.

 

[saundra007]

It's impossible to answer regarding a "phuemona" that is badly infected as I have no idea of what you are speaking. Pneumo means "air" and refers to the lungs. Additionally, I have no idea why you think you did not have a heart attack when the EKGs apparently confirmed that you either had a heart attack in the past without knowing it or you had a recent/ongoing heart attack or were showing signs of an impending heart attack with probably coronary artery causation, thus the heart cath.

One of the most common complications of a heart cath is a pneumothorax. It is possible that you developed a hole in your lung during the heart cath procedure and it was so small that you were asymptomatic--however, and this is a big 'however'--it is routine and standard procedure for a chest
x-ray to be obtained after a heart cath and the purpose of the x-ray is to look for a pneumothorax. If you suffered a pneumothorax as a result of the heartcath, it should be visible on the x-ray. If it was visible and you did not receive treatment for the pneumothorax, then an act of negligence did occur.

If an act of negligence did occur, as described above, do you then have a valid claim of medical malpractice? Probably not. You would have required hospitalization and treatment, possibly with a chest tube insertion, and most definitely with the potential to develop an infection and/or pneumonia.

There is no guarantee that your lung would have healed without surgical intervention. Much depends on your lung's compliance (ability to stretch and return to relaxed state). Apparently, your lung was not very compliant and either the original pneumothorax got bigger or incompletely healed and then 'blew' making the hole larger or your lung 'blew' a completely separate hole, which is not uncommon in treatment of a pneumothorax.

Having 48% lung function is a moot statement unless you have a comparative % from before the heart cath and the pneumothorax. It is not uncommon for a patient to actually have improved lung function after a pneumothorax and/or lung surgery. How could you defend against such an assertion without evidence of your lungs % before any procedure? You can't.

I don't know why you think you did not have a heart attack. You have stated nothing that disproves the diagnosis of a heart attack. I hope you have not stopped your medications that were ordered to prevent further heart attacks.

FYI--heart attacks are not diagnosed by the heart's rhythm. An EKG, or ECG, reveals much more than the heart's rhythm. I can 'read' an EKG and tell you whether or not the changes are new or old, which portion of the heart or its lining or its tissues are affected, which coronary artery is involved (if a coronary artery is involved), and how your heart is positioned in your chest, and whether or not you need a heart cath STAT, later, or at all. If I can do that with an EKG, no doubt a cardiologist can do the same. As a beloved poster once said, "it doesn't take a rocket surgeon".

I hope the information helps you in determining what actually occurred.
EC

Thank you for the information, I had forgot to mention one thing reguarding my heart. Before the heart cath I had chemical stress test. The same doctor who did the cath did the chemical also. He said it was normal too? Like I stated I went too the ER rooom on several diiffereent times and a dr. said possible a old heart attack???? Another said lower part of heart then shortly after that is when they did the cath.

 

[saundra007]

Thank you for the information, I had forgot to mention one thing reguarding my heart. Before the heart cath I had chemical stress test. The same doctor who did the cath did the chemical also. He said it was normal too? Like I stated I went too the ER rooom on several diiffereent times and a dr. said possible a old heart attack???? Another said lower part of heart then shortly after that is when they did the cath.

 

[shell007]

ellencee and OP:

I am not trying to stir up controversy here, but I have an additional bit of information to add here.

My husband is a heart surgeon and our very good friend is head of the cath lab.

With that being said...Cardiac cath's are done normally through the femoral artery and/or sometimes (but more rare) the arm. In any event...I have discussed this question with both of them this afternoon and neither agree with the following statement that:
"complications of a heart cath is a pneumothorax"

Interpret this information as you choose, but just thought I would add it!

 

[rmet4nzkx]

Shelly, why don't you have your husband post a reply, it would be most informative to have a cardiac surgeon offer his opinion.

 

[saundra007]

reply of my thorax

Here again I sure dont want to stirr up to many emotions over my health problems but just trying to get some insight if this couuld be malpractric. I am very sick over this and will never be the same again. May of 2005 I was walking 2 mile aday, now I cant even go up and down stairs without being out of breath. Regardless, I was sick before I had the thorax since i had went to the ER room 3-4 times before the doctor finally said i might have had a heart attack then he does the chemical and heart cath and said it was all normal. Then two weeks later i have the thorax.

 

[rmet4nzkx]

Without a review of your medical history and records it is impossible to determine if there is a valid case of malpractice.

Do you have a history of smoking?
Are you in a cardiac rehab program?

 

[shell007]

Shelly, why don't you have your husband post a reply, it would be most informative to have a cardiac surgeon offer his opinion.

I would love to, but unfortunately he is never here. Why do you think I spend so much time on this forum? (NOT anything to be proud of, but...it is what it is)!

Actually, right now it is 6:00 on the east coast. He called about 1/2 hour ago and is just starting an emergency CABG (Coronary Artery Bipass Graft) from the ER.

I am sometimes curious who we ever conceived two children!!!

 

[saundra007]

I do have asthma, and i have smoked in the past. So yes my lungs have had a lick or two, and no i have had no rehab for my heart since after the chemcal test and the heart cath they sad i was fine so why should i go to a heart rehab? No reason to.

What I dont understand as many times as i went to the ER room over breathing problems and pain in my chest and as many times as they took x-rays of my lungs seems to me they would have seen pneumothorax or anything else bad concerning my lungs and the complications i was having. They all wanted to say i had heart attack and again after all test they said my heart was fine!