TABLE.

Relevant Cases

Case	Facts	Outcome
1. Lo v. Burke, 455 S.E 2d 9 (Va. 1995)12	Incidental finding of pancreatic cyst, present on CT scan obtained to observe liver, was not detected by radiologist; cyst was later determined to be early pancreatic cancer	Radiologist admitted that she was negligent in failing to detect and report cyst on first CT scan; liability not barred by statute of limitations
2. Davy v. Schiffer, 2008 NY Misc LEXIS 932713	Incidental finding of spiculated lung nodule on CT scan, done to evaluate possible acute pulmonary embolus, was either not detected or not reported to patient; patient later found to have lung cancer	Trial court denied attending physician’s motion for summary judgment motion; the covering physician was granted summary judgment.
3. Durham v. County of Maui, 2010 WL 2943358 (D. Haw. 2010)14	12 year old noted to have “incidental finding” of enlarged aorta on echocardiogram following multiple trauma; pediatric cardiologist in Hawai’i did not recognize significance but recommended follow up. Plaintiff alleged that this recommendation was not effectively communicated to receiving hospital in Texas. Child subsequently died of aortic dissection	Defendants were denied summary judgment because of triable issues about recognition of significance of enlarged aorta or communication with receiving hospital
4. Cooper v. Ciccarelli, 2009 WL 539911 (D. Kan. 2009),15	X-ray report stated in part “Non-calcified pulmonary parenchymal nodule, right mid lung…. Tumor cannot be excluded” Physician’s assistant initialed report but did not inform either the patient or supervising physician; patient was diagnosed one year later with lung cancer	Supervising physician was denied summary judgment despite lack of expert testimony about duty of PA to inform him.
5. Workman v. O’Bryan, 2011 WL 663819 (Ind. App. 2011)16	Oncologist who obtained PET scan to assess stage of Hodgkin’s Disease failed to act on radiologist’s report of incidental finding of enlarged bladder; patient later suffered renal failure due to urinary retention and neurogenic bladder	Provider unsuccessfully argued that the case should not go forward on ground that statute of limitation had expired.
6. Stallworth v. Boren, 54 P.3d 923 (Haw. App. 2002)17	Physicians failed to detect rare arteriovenous malformation on CT scan of patient presenting with history of learning difficulties and previous head trauma	Jury found that defendant did not breach standard of care; per expert testimony at trial, the incidental finding was considered so rare and subtle that a reasonable, prudent general radiologist would be unlikely to recognize its import in context of the patient’s presentation
7. Riley v. Stone, 900 A.2d 1087 (R.I. 2006)18	Neurologist seeing patient for weakness of lower extremities obtained MRI which showed incidental finding of moderate hypertrophy of adenoidal soft tissue; neurologist dismissed finding as likely to be due to recent viral illness; two years later patient diagnosed with nasopharyngeal cancer	Jury found that neurologist did not breach standard of care for neurologist
8. Cifaretto v. Dalton, 2011 WL 831867 (N.J. Super. App. Div. 2011)19	Patient who presented to ER with musculoskeletal complaints of back pain, argued that incidental finding of possible ureteral stone by radiologist was not disclosed and acted upon, resulting in additional harm	Summary judgment for defendants upheld; court found that lower court correctly determined that there was insufficient evidence to demonstrate a breach of the standard of care by either ER physician or radiologist; court ruled that radiologist read film correctly but had no obligation to communicate with patient or ER physician.