Exposing the LASIK Scam

One Surgeon at a Time
It is currently Mon Dec 10, 2018 3:35 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 24 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Dr. Stephen Slade sued for malpractice by Sheryl Sullivan
PostPosted: Fri Nov 25, 2005 5:43 pm 
Offline
 E-mail  WWW  Profile

Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2005 5:52 pm
Posts: 127
No. 98-212329

SHERYL SULLIVAN

vs.

STEPHEN G. SLADE, M.D. and
RICHARD N. BAKER, O.D.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS
55th JUDICIAL DISTRICT

PLAINTIFF?s ORIGINAL PETITION

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:

Comes now SHERYL SULLIVAN, Plaintiff in the above titled and numbered cause, and files this ORIGINAL PETITION against STEVEN G. SLADE, M.D. and RICHARD N. BAKER, O.D. , and would show unto the Court as follows:

I. Parties

SHERYL SULLIVAN is an individual residing in Sugar Land, Harris County, Texas. Defendant STEVEN G. SLADE, M.D. is an individual who may be served at his place of business located at 3900 Essex Lane, Suite 101, in Houston, Harris County, Texas (77027). Defendant RICHARD N. BAKER, O.D. is an individual who may be served at his place of business located at 3900 Essex Lane, Suite 101, in Houston, Harris County, Texas (77027).

I I. Venue

Venue is proper in Harris County, Texas because all of the Plaintiff?s cause of action Plaintiff?s Original Petition arose there, and both Plaintiff and Defendant reside there.

III. Notice Requirement

Pursuant to Tex.Rev.Civ.Stat. Art. 4590i, Section 4.01, written notice, return receipt requested, was given to the Defendant Slade more than 60 days prior to the filing of this claim.

IV. Facts

Prior to the incident in question, the Plaintiff was myopic, or nearsighted. She sought the professional services of Defendants in order to undergo refractive surgery designed to improve her vision to 20/20 without correction. On or about September, 19, 1996, she underwent evaluation by Defendants in order to determine the coordinates to be used for her specific procedure.

On or about September 20, 1996 she underwent refractive surgery known as ?LASIK? by the Defendants at their medical office. However, rather than use the coordinates of Plaintiff, the Defendants used the coordinates and measurements of another patient were used to calculate the manner in which the refractive surgery was performed. As a result, the Plaintiff was over-corrected and became hyperopic, or farsighted.

Because the surgical procedure to correct hyperopia was not approved for use in the United States by the F.D.A., it was necessary for the Plaintiff to be taken to Mexico, where she underwent a second experimental procedure in an effort to re-correct her eyes to 20/20. Despite the second procedure, the Plaintiff remains over corrected.

V. Negligence

Plaintiff would show that Defendants owed her a duty to use the coordinates and measurements which had been taken on her eyes in order to perform the refractive correction of her eyes. Plaintiff would show that the use of a different patient?s coordinates and measurements on her eyes by the Defendants is a deviation from the standard of care and constitutes negligence. Plaintiff would show that Defendants failed to act as an ordinary, reasonable, prudent health care providers would under the same or similar circumstances.

More specifically, Plaintiff would show that using another patient?s coordinates and measurements on her eyes during the refractive surgery is within the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. Expert testimony is not required to establish Defendants? negligence as it is something which a lay person can understand without the necessity of expert testimony.

Plaintiff would further show that the employees, agents and/or servants of Defendants were negligent for failing to verify her proper identity, and verify that only her coordinates and measurements were used for the refractive surgery. Such failure constitutes negligence. Defendants are responsible for the negligent acts of their employees, agents and/or servants under the doctrines of vicarious liability and respondeat superior.

VI. Damages

Plaintiff would show that she has been damaged and is entitled to compensation. Plaintiff would show that she has suffered:

mental anguish;

physical pain and suffering

medical expenses; and

lost wages.

Plaintiff would further show that she can reasonably be expected to suffer such damages in the future.

Plaintiff seeks conpensation in the amount of Fifty Thousand ($50,000.00) Dollars.

VII. Jury Trial

Plaintiff herein requests that the matters complained of herein be heard and determined by a Jury.

VIII. Prayer

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Plaintiff prays that Defendants be required to answer and appear herein, that judgment be entered against the Defendants, that Plaintiff be awarded pre- and post-judgement interest, costs of court, and for other and further relief as she may be justly entitled.

Respectfully submitted,
ABRAHAM, WATKINS,
NICHOLS & FRIEND

C.F. Jeb Wait, M.D., J.D.
TBN: 20667220
800 Commerce
Houston Tx 77002
(713) 222 7211
(713) 225 0827 ? telecopier
Attorney for the Plaintiff

http://www.lasikfraud.com/news/archives/000134.html


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Nov 26, 2005 1:40 am 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 9:06 pm
Posts: 297
Dr. Stephen Slade was a defense expert witness against a LASIK patient with 8 mm pupils who sued his/her surgeon for giving him/her a 6 mm optical zone (no blend).

Dr. Stephen Slade must know that pupil size matters. If not, why did he make this comment in the March, 2000 issue of Journal of Cataract and Refractive Surgery?

"This case illustrates several low-grade problems that in combination can create an unhappy patient. This patient had everything going for him preoperatively but a small amount of asymmetrical astigmatism topographically and the enormous pupil. An 8.0 mm pupil is the largest I have seen with a Colvard pupillometer, and that was in very dim light. I agree with the original treatment plan. A 217 laser can ablate a signal zone to 7.0 mm and then taper the power to 10.0 mm. Therefore there is still considerable refractive ablation at 8.0 mm, or the limit of the pupil."

http://www.ascrs.org/publications/jcrs/csapr00.htm

Dr. Stephen Slade published a book titled "The Complete Book of Laser Eye Surgery" in 2000. The book is written for prospective LASIK patients. All through the book there are statements such as this one, "To obtain good LASIK results, doctors must carefully measure how much your round pupils widen in the dark. To avoid halos and glare, your surgeon has to make certain that your new optical zone, the area treated by the laser, is adequate for your individual pupil size in low light conditions. In other words, your ophthalmologist must match your optical zone to the size of your pupil when it's fully dilated."

Dr. Stephen Slade has a warning about pupil size and night vision disturbances in the informed consent document that he requires patients to sign.

So what is Dr. Stephen Slade doing testifying against a LASIK patient whose pupils were mis-measured and not not warned that his/her vision would be permanently impaired?


Top
 
 Post subject: Stephen Slade must be in a lot of trouble by now
PostPosted: Wed Nov 30, 2005 1:08 am 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2005 4:28 pm
Posts: 643
Stephen Slade quote:

http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/03/ ... 3991t1.htm

"LASIK, the more LASIK you do, the more trouble you run into."


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 08, 2005 6:12 am 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Tue Dec 06, 2005 11:08 pm
Posts: 23
he also says this below in the same fda transcript, which shows you how much they dont know about ICLs, even though the fda approved it. not sure why slade says that theyd know about it if a patient had corneal decompensation. that patient could be under a gag order or could be just covered up, like a lot of patients are


We believe the stabilization of endothelial cell loss occurs between three to four years. We have the absence of any cases of corneal decompensation in ten years of history greater than 30,000 implants internationally. Again, as I mentioned, I don't know if we got all of the data from those patients, but I do believe that the first person that had a corneal decompensation would be quite ‑ ‑ we'd know about that.

There is a iron‑clad Sponsor commitment to continued specular microscopy data. I don't have a financial interest in STAAR. I wasn't an investigator in this study. I am a paid consultant, but I can assure you of their commitment to continue the collection of specular microscopy data post‑market approval, in all study patients through five years or beyond with the same rigor of analysis, the same lab, the same Dr. Edelhauser looking at the specular microscopy images.


Top
 
 Post subject: Dr. Stephen Slade's idea of good correctable vision
PostPosted: Fri Dec 16, 2005 1:14 am 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2005 4:28 pm
Posts: 643
Dr. Stephen Slade testified as an expert witness against a patient who received a 6mm optical zone with no blend on a pupil size of over 8mm.

Here is an image of the patient's night vison. In a deposition for this case, Dr. Stephen Slade stated that this patient had "good correctable vision". If Dr. Slade thinks this is good correctable vision, better steer clear of his laser. Is his testimony believable?

Image


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Jan 01, 2006 2:55 am 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 9:06 pm
Posts: 297
It seems that Dr. Slade can't make up his mind whether pupil size matters or not. Until he figures out just how important pupil size is, he should probably refrain from being an expert witness for surgeons who screw up by operating on patients whose pupils are too large.

http://www.eyeworld.org/article.php?sid=2413

Although legal literature suggests large pupil size is a risk factor during refractive surgery, medical literature does not agree.
During a panel discussion on refractive surgery complications, Richard L. Lindstrom, M.D., adjunct professor emeritus, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, said he performs surgery on any pupil size.
Stephen G. Slade, M.D., Houston, agreed and added that no simple nomogram shows this shouldn?t be done. Surgeons should instead consider pre-op symptoms and the amount of myopia with which patients present.


From Slade's book, THE COMPLETE BOOK OF LASER EYE SURGERY, Sourcebooks, Inc., copyright 2000, page 80:

The flap must be large enough so that, once it is lifted, Dr. Slade can laser the correct size "optical zone" (the new treated lens-like area) on Karen's inner cornea. The diameter of her new curved lens will be important to her night vision. When Karen's pupil dilates in a darkened room to let in more light, she could experience night glare and halos if light should pass through an untreated ring-shaped area.


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Mar 04, 2006 1:32 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 9:06 pm
Posts: 297
Here he goes again. One minute pupil size doesn't matter, the next minute he is prescribing Alphagan to reduce pupil size.

http://www.eyeworld.org/article.php?sid ... y=alphagan

Stephen G. Slade, MD: We need to be very careful and make sure patients don't have residual cylinder that wasn't picked up. Sometimes you can go back and re-treat them and fix the problem, which is actually a refractive problem and not necessarily related to their pupil. In some cases, night driving glasses help address a residual refractive error. You may not be able to do any more, but if you just give them glasses and alphagan, it may really make a big difference.

_________________
Bill

"What concerns me is that if the person informing the patient is themselves poorly or inaccurately informed then how on earth can consent ever be truly informed?" Dr. Sarah Smith


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 12, 2006 12:07 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 1:23 pm
Posts: 2080
Somebody needs to warn both Slade and Lindstrom. Schallhorn cannot be sued (because he's military), so he might not care.

http://www.duluthsuperior.com/mld/dulut ... 323001.htm

Jury awards man $3 million

MALPRACTICE: The man had sued Northern Refractive Surgery Center for
the care and treatment he received.

BY MARK STODGHILL
NEWS TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER

A St. Louis County jury determined that Northern Refractive Surgery
Center was negligent in its care and treatment of a Duluth man and
awarded him more than $3 million in damages.
The verdict reached Thursday night is believed to be the largest jury
monetary award in Duluth history.
Lowell Larson, 34, manager of technical services at the College of St.
Scholastica, brought the malpractice lawsuit against Dr. Jeffrey R.
Weis and Northern Refractive Surgery Center of Hermantown last July.
Larson alleged that the defendants were negligent in his care and
treatment by:
? Failing to properly measure the size of his pupils before
performing LASIK surgery
on Jan. 4, 2001.
? Failing to properly screen him from LASIK eye surgery because of
his larger-than-average pupils
.
? Failing to properly advise Larson in a meaningful way of the risks
associated with LASIK eye surgery, given his pupil size.

Larson claimed that as a direct result of negligent care and treatment
he sustained "significant and permanent disturbances in his vision,
particularly at night."
In LASIK surgery, precise and controlled removal of corneal tissue by a
special laser reshapes the cornea, changing its focusing power. It is
intended to reduce a person's dependency on correctional lenses.
The eight-member jury determined that Northern Refractive Surgery
failed to inform Larson about the risks involved in LASIK surgery,
about alternatives to the LASIK procedure, and that the failure was a
direct cause of harm or injury to the plaintiff.
Jurors also found that Larson was negligent with regard to his own care
and treatment, but that negligence was not a direct cause of harm or
injury to himself.
The total jury award is $3,002,950.
The 10th and final question on the special verdict form asked jurors
how much money would fairly and adequately compensate Larson for future
pain, disability, embarrassment and emotional distress reasonably
certain to occur in the future directly caused by the LASIK surgery.
Jury foreman Steffan M. Johnson wrote in the figure "$2,687,500 or
$62,500 a year for 43 years." Johnson couldn't be reached for comment
Tuesday.
Jurors determined that $312,500 would compensate Larson for pain,
disability, embarrassment and emotional distress up to the time of
trial and $2,950 for medical expenses up to the time of trial.
Larson was represented by Minneapolis attorney Michael A. Zimmer.
Zimmer said the eye surgery hasn't adversely affected his client's
professional career.
"There was no wage loss, no significant medical expense," Zimmer said
during a phone interview Tuesday evening. "It was a quality of life
issue. When it gets dark, his world changes from ours. When it's dark
and his pupils are fully dilated, he sees starbursts, halos. On a dark
road when a vehicle approaches him, the oncoming lights become
virtually blinding for him.... He knows it and he avoids driving at
night."
Zimmer said it was "a nice verdict" considering that Duluth-area jurors
are known around the state as being conservative with their monetary
awards, he said.
"It was good to see the jury look beyond wage loss and those types of
things and looked for what it is like for somebody 34 years old and has
a life expectancy of 43 (more) years and has to live like this with
apparently nothing you can do about it," Zimmer said.
Larson declined comment Tuesday night.
Duluth attorney Eric Hylden represented the defendants.
"While we have great respect for the jury system, this verdict is
deeply disappointing," Hylden said Tuesday. "The surgeons at Northern
Refractive Surgery Center are experienced, careful and have improved
the vision of thousands of patients. Northern Refractive will pursue
all possible avenues for relief from this verdict, and believe we will
be successful in that pursuit."
Hylden declined to comment on what he sees as possible appealable
issues.
MARK STODGHILL reports on legal affairs and public safety. He can be
reached weekdays at (218) 723-5333 or by e-mail at
mstodgh...@duluthnews.com.

_________________
Broken Eyes

"The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." Plato


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jun 08, 2006 12:17 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 1:23 pm
Posts: 2080
I guess they think it's funny.

Quote:
Dr. Slade, meanwhile, urged Dr. Dell to perform surgery on a patient, played by John Doane, M.D., Kansas City, Kan., who clearly was a poor candidate...


http://www.eyeworld.org/article.php?sid=3181

_________________
Broken Eyes

"The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." Plato


Top
 
 Post subject: Dr. Stephen Slade: wavefront not best for initial LASIK?
PostPosted: Sat Aug 12, 2006 7:15 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2006 7:17 pm
Posts: 161
Does Stephen Slade NOT recommend custom or 'wavefront' treatments for initial LASIK treatments???

See:
http://www.visiontexas.com/online/opt-customwavefront.htm

Excerpt:
Quote:
"We find the best results are when people have the major errors, common myopia and astigmatism treated first then Custom LASIK in those cases that need the refinement."


Dr. Slade, a reminder: Enhancements are NOT FDA APPROVED. Do you tell your patients this before they have surgery?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------?-----------
WE ARE STILL LOOKING FOR A PATIENT WITH NORMAL VIRGIN CORNEAS WHO HAD THEIR CORNEAL DISTORTIONS KNOWN AS HIGHER ORDER ABERRATIONS DECREASED, RATHER THAN *INCREASED* BY A WAVEFRONT TREATMENT.

See 'Take the Wavefront Challenge" at

http://lasikflap.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=86


Last edited by Truly on Sat Aug 12, 2006 7:25 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 
 Post subject: Dr. Stephen Slade wants patients to be better informed???
PostPosted: Sat Aug 12, 2006 7:18 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2006 7:17 pm
Posts: 161
We have some informational pamphlets that we would LOVE to circulate in
your market area, Dr. Slade! Coming soon!

http://www.visiontexas.com/online/as-experience.htm
Excerpt:
Quote:
"We believe the more you know about refractive surgery, the better your experience will be."

----------------------------------------------------
Knowing that the flap never heals and that all forms of corneal refractive surgery:

- *induce* on average, not *decrease* permanent corneal distortions known as higher order aberrations that cannot be fixed by glasses
- thin and weaken the cornea
- cause cornal nerve damage

Knowing these things will help you have a better experience? Perhaps your experience will be better because you choose not to have surgery?

To quote Sandy Keller's terrific bumper stickers:
LASIK: The more you know the worse it looks.


Last edited by Truly on Sat Aug 12, 2006 7:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 
 Post subject: Stephen Slade: did your experience help Sheryl Sullivan?
PostPosted: Sat Aug 12, 2006 7:22 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2006 7:17 pm
Posts: 161
Dr. Stephen Slade, did your vast experience help your patient, Sheryl
Sullivan? You know, the patient you accidentally treated with a laser
programmed with the wrong coordinates?

http://www.visiontexas.com/online/as-experience.htm
Quote:
"Dr Slade has more experience with more refractive surgery techniques
than any refractive surgeon in Houston or Texas."


Here is a link to a complete transcript of the court documents:

http://lasikflap.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=2774


Last edited by Truly on Sat Aug 12, 2006 7:24 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Dr. Stephen Slade wants patients to be better informed??
PostPosted: Sat Aug 12, 2006 7:23 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 1:23 pm
Posts: 2080
Truly wrote:
"We believe the more you know about refractive surgery, the better your experience will be."


If Dr. Stephen Slade truly believes that, he should require all of his patients to spend several hours reading this bulletin board (particularly the research section) prior to signing an informed consent.

_________________
Broken Eyes

"The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." Plato


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: Dr. Stephen Slade wants patients to be better informed??
PostPosted: Sun Aug 13, 2006 9:47 pm 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2006 2:57 am
Posts: 243
Broken Eyes wrote:
Truly wrote:
"We believe the more you know about refractive surgery, the better your experience will be."


If Dr. Stephen Slade truly believes that, he should require all of his patients to spend several hours reading this bulletin board (particularly the research section) prior to signing an informed consent.



I second this. Dr. Stephen is a liar and totally wrong, but he is right about patients being informed. The more you know, the worse lasik looks! I remember back in high school in the early days of lasik, I knew nothing about it except that it could oneday "fix" my myopia. In the last couple years I have researched lasik, read articles and know this to be the oppposite that lasik breaks eyes, not "fix" them! If people knew about the risks and flaws of lasik as well as I did, only crazy or desperate people would touch lasik. Ive seen people chose not to listen to the truth that they dont want to hear or pretend doesnt exist. They learn the hard way after lasik :?

_________________
Lasik damages every eye! Lasik induces more aberrations, even so called "wavefront!" Stick to glasses!


Top
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Aug 14, 2006 1:30 am 
Offline
 Profile

Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 1:23 pm
Posts: 2080
Dr. Stephen Slade states that he performed the first LASIK procedure in the U.S.

http://www.visiontexas.com/images/Slade ... graphy.pdf

To me, this means that he has been permanently damaging patients' eyes longer than anyone in this country!!! :shock: :shock: :shock:

_________________
Broken Eyes

"The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." Plato


Top
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 24 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group  
Design By Poker Bandits