IMPORTANT POINTS
Procedure – It is always necessary for the Urologist to check the endoscopic equipment at the end of the procedure.
Foreign bodies – it is admitted that it broke and complete removal is imperative, as foreign bodies calcify and obstruct the urinary tract.
A broken guide wire can lead to many complications and can be rebellious to antibiotic treatment. It is always necessary for the Urologist to check the endoscopic equipment at the end of the procedure.

ORDER

Meena Ramanathan, In-Charge President.—This appeal is filed by the Appellant/Complainant under Section 15 of Consumer Protection Act, 1986 against the order passed in CC.No.113 of 2008 dated 26.04.2019 on the file of District Consumer Commission, Karimnagar.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties are referred to as arrayed in the complaint.

3. The brief facts of the complaint are that – the Complainant Smt.Thumu Latha, aged 38 years was suffering from back ache and approached NIMS, Hyderabad on 26.07.2006. After undergoing all the necessary tests, it was diagnosed as Renal Calculi Lt. PCNL to be done. However, she was instructed to return after 15 days but her pain was unbearable, therefore, she approached Opposite Party No.1 hospital on 24.08.2006. Operation was conducted on 26.08.2006 but despite undergoing the surgery, her pain and suffering continued and an X-Ray was conducted on 02.09.2006 which revealed a foreign body in her left kidney.

4. It is her case that during the course of the operation, Opposite Party No.2 and 3 have conducted the surgery negligently and her suffering and pain has been immense. She approached other doctors and underwent CT Scan of abdomen which revealed a foreign body in the left kidney. She was advised to undergo another operation to remove the foreign body, but she is not in a financial position to undergo the surgery. The present complaint is filed against the negligence of the Opposite Parties in discharging their duty and seeking recompense for her continuous pain and suffering due to which she has also had to suffer business related loss.

5. The Opposite Party No.1 hospital filed their written version denying the averments made by the Complainant. Admittedly, the Complainant underwent the procedure on 26.08.2006 and Dr.Nanda Kumar-Opposite Party No.2 performed the procedure. The usual period for discharge in respect of PCNL operation is between 5 to 10 days, depending on the patient’s constitution. In the present case, the Complainant was discharged on the 7th day excluding the day of operation.

6. The patient was discharged on 02.09.2006 and during the period the dressing was changed from time to time. Any surgery which results in an incision will take time to heal and in the instant case, namely PCNL, a tube is inserted into the renal pelvis through the calyx and the tube is removed a few days after the operation. If there is any foreign particle in the body, there will be an immediate infection/ abscess warranting surgery.

7. The probe or guide wire used is made of a material which is non-reactionary and it is impossible to perform PCNL without the guide wire. What was informed to the patient/Complainant was that the particle remained in the body while removing the guide wire was harmless and compatible to the human body and that there is no danger or harm indicated. The small particle that accidentally stuck in the tissue of the kidney area is a small part of the guide wire which is made of insert or bio-compatible material and is therefore of no consequence. As mentioned supra, there is no necessity for removal of foreign body as alleged and hence there is no cause for complaint. Therefore, they pray to dismiss the complaint in limini.

8. The Opposite Party No.2 filed written version denying the averments made in the complaint. Admittedly, the Complainant underwent surgery for removal of kidney stone which was ensconced at the central renal area and the same was successfully removed. After surgery the usual post-operative care was taken and the patient was discharged after removal of sutures on healing of surgical incision. The Complainant appears to be under the impression that there would be no pain during and post operation. This 2nd Opposite Party honestly informed the Complainant about the retained particle in the kidney and from his extensive knowledge as an Urologist, assured the Complainant that the particle is harmless and the same is a statement of fact.

9. The Co