Man Loses Penis - Was It A Medical Mistake?
MalwareBytes is GeekDrop's Favorite Anti-Malware Solution
Act now to get a huge savings on GeekDrop's favorite Backup, Imaging, & Drive Utilities. Also our member's #1 choice!
Here is the question - if you are warned PRIOR to surgery that there are risks and that you have medical issues and you still choose the surgery and you have problems is it the doctors fault? Well a 62 yr old man went to the urologist to talk about his erectile dysfunction issues. The man had been happily married for 25 years. After talking with the doctor he decided to have a penile implant. The problem is that Mr Enrique Milla is a diabetic. Not only is he a diabetic but his diabetes is uncontrolled. Diabetics have a much higher rate of infections and being uncontrolled that puts him at higher risks.
Well Mr Enrique decided to go ahead with the surgery. The surgery was done, he came out of it ok but then later turned gangrenous after a infection had set in. In the end the penis was amputated (removed). The SunSentinel then reported that the man now has to sit and pee like a lady would, he has no sex life and he can not go to the beach. Ok I have no idea what the beach has to do with it (maybe he was a speedo fan???).
He is now suing for damages and his wife also has a law suit going for damages also (I'm guessing loss of services). The poor man is now in hiding. I cant really blame him its bad enough that it happened but now its all over the media with his name.
Now my heart breaks for the guy but he did have risks prior to surgery. At what point does it no longer become a liability to the doctor if he warns patients? Does the man need to take some of he fault since he was informed? If you were the judge in the case how would you rule in this case?
Sorry about the subject guys - look on the bright side I didn't post any pictures.
- 1850 reads
yeah see I go back and forth. It was a risk and it sounds like the Dr did a ok job but the man got a infection - no one caused that it just happened. As for the risk if it was that bad then they shouldn't have done the surgery - its not like it was medically necessary as in life and death. I do feel bad for the man (and the wife) but his sex life isn't completely dead he just needs to rethink some things 
if ya know what I mean 
Having some knowledge of these things, here is what I say.
1.) If the physician in question knew that the patients blood sugar wasn't under control, why then did he bother to offer doing this to begin with?
2.) Diabetic or not, there is that risk of infection for 2 simple reasons in this case:
b.) When you have an implant, you're creating the housekeeping for the same, thus increasing the risk of something like that happening.
3.) If this person was being treated for ED, how much of that was related to old age and how much of it was related to a vascular issue?
When you have something like that, it's due to a lack of blood flow to the penis, and vascular disease can cause that to happen. Having said that, so can CHF regardless of the cause, side effects of certain medications, etc. Diabetic patients are at risk for coronary issues, and other forms of vascular disease. It is possible for there to be enough plaque accumulated within the vessels within the penis to cause the ED. That's also a good way for an infection to set in-implant or not.
So given that, did this physician perform any pathology tests regardless? I mean....before you go cutting into that, it would be of benefit to know why this person is having this issue to begin with, and it would be helpful to know what else they tried before having what appears to be an elective procedure. I say elective in that it's not life threatening, but at the same time I can see how that could cause a marriage issue.
When you have someone who doesn't have their blood sugar under control, and you go slicing in, that's a red flag by and in itself. I am wondering if this person who lost their penis had something else going on, or if perhaps it was something in the OR. There are pathogens that come about in facilities-which is how my diabetic grandfather lost his leg (in part at least).
I want to say, there had to be something else going on besides just having the implant, and there are indications there. The question is, did the physician know this? Did the physician have a means to evaluate that? If so, why did the physician agree to it as any surgeon should have known that uncontrolled diabetes can increase the risk of infection as a result, and it's also a state of comorbidity/contributing factor to vascular disease. Secondly, if you know there is a lack of blood flow going on down there, is it due to an occlusion of some kind secondary to diabetes, or what?
What happens is you can get occlusions in the form of plaque just like you do your coronary arteries in your heart, and the vessels of the menengial layer of the brain. That can cause a thrombosin event or simply inhibit the flow of blood to tissue, thus forcing it to starve to death. When that happens, the tissue becomes necrotic. As a result, infection sets in and it can spread through the blood stream. That's when it becomes fatal, so before it happens, the necrosis must be removed. In the meantime, you get some whopper antibiotic going to prevent the spread of the infection, you remove the diseased part, check the CBC and D/C after a normal reading.
Was this surgeon in Florida-the land of some of the worst doctors in existance? I know as had I listend to my cardiologist in Orlando at the time as directed, I'd either be dead or on immunospuressants due to a transplant I might not have been able to find a donor for. There are some very poor physicians in Florida-period.
Having said that, it is normal for someone to undergo an invasive procedure and see a rise in blood sugar. This is a simple thing to treat with some form of insulin. Personally, I'd prefer something besides lantus pending the circumstance that doesn't stay in the body for quite as long till the patient stabilizes. After that, switch from a shorter acting insulin to lantus for the long term.
-joe
PS. I've seen pics of a dude after he went wee wee on an electric fence. Ouch.
Was this surgeon in Florida-the land of some of the worst doctors in existance? I There are some very poor physicians in Florida-period.
Yeah we have some crappy ones but we also have some great ones. I think every state has some crappy ones.
Great write up Joe 
Who's New
Single & Not Looking
oh wow poor guy.... well he was warned of the risks and still decided to go ahead with it, the thing is was he told that there was a risk of him losing it completely? If the doctor omitted that very important risk he probably should be held liable.