Opinion ID: 2978734
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Bypass Surgery

Text: The District Court based its decision in part on the fact that Elam was aware that an unsuccessful stenting procedure by Dr. Menzies would necessitate bypass surgery. This was error because there is evidence in the record that Elam may have required a bypass even if there had been a successful stenting procedure. As Elam understood it, the stents were a first attempt to fix the blockages in his coronary arteries.3 “[O]ften the patient cannot know whether the undesirable outcome is simply an unfortunate result of proficient medical care or whether it is the consequence of substandard treatment.” Harrison v. Valentine, 184 S.W.3d 521, 524 (Ky. 2005). The necessity of the bypass surgery does not, in itself, demonstrate that Elam discovered or should have discovered Dr. Menzies’ potential malpractice.