Paid for a full tummy tuck and discovered she underwent a partial surgery: "No one explained what was done to her body"

A resident of the Gaza Envelope in her 40s is suing Clalit Aesthetics, Clalit Health Services, and the doctor who operated on her, claiming that during an aesthetic surgery, it was decided to change the procedure she had agreed to, while she was under anesthesia and without her knowledge.

According to the statement of claim filed by Adv. Ran Shapira to the Tel Aviv Magistrate's Court, only after she insisted on receiving answers did it become clear to her that the planned full tummy tuck had not been performed. An expert on her behalf estimated her disability in the field of plastic surgery at 19%, and a psychiatrist determined a mental disability of 30%.

A lawsuit for medical malpractice was filed by Adv. Ran Shapira against the operating surgeon, S.L.H. Medical Services which operates the "Clalit Aesthetics" network, and Clalit Health Services, claiming that a resident of the Gaza Envelope known as R. entered the operating room for a full tummy tuck, but woke up after having undergone only a partial procedure, without being informed of the change in the surgery plan.

R. decided to undergo an aesthetic surgery after finishing the childbearing chapter of her life. Among other things, she wanted to treat the separation of the abdominal muscles that had been diagnosed in her.

"They told her everything was fine"

R. turned to the Clalit Aesthetics network and received a price quote for a full tummy tuck alongside liposuction from several areas of the body. Later, she underwent an ultrasound of the abdominal wall, in which two hernias were demonstrated, a small hernia above the navel and another small umbilical hernia.

Ahead of the surgery, R. was asked to sign an informed consent form for a full tummy tuck. According to Adv. Shapira, the form described a procedure including the detachment and transposition of the navel and even contained an explicit reference to the repair of an umbilical hernia.

During the surgery, R. underwent liposuction in the amount of 4.8 liters, as well as an incision in the area of the cesarean scar and suturing in the area of the abdominal muscles. However, according to the lawsuit, the surgery report contains no documentation of the detachment or transposition of the navel, nor a description of an incision around it. The hernias diagnosed before the surgery are also not mentioned in the report, and it was not documented that they were located or repaired.

According to R., when she woke up from the anesthesia, she was not told that the surgery plan had changed, and she was not updated that the full tummy tuck she had signed for and paid for had not been fully performed.

In the weeks following the surgery, she began to suspect that something was not right. She noticed that around her navel there was no scar characteristic of a full tummy tuck. She returned for check-ups at Clalit Aesthetics and complained about the appearance of the abdomen and the results of the liposuction, but according to her, she was told that everything was fine and that she should wait between six months to a year to receive the final result.

R. was not convinced and turned privately to a specialist in plastic and aesthetic surgery. In his examination, irregularities in the abdomen and possible separation of the abdominal muscles were described. The expert also noted that around the navel, the scar expected after a full tummy tuck is not visible.

In the summary of the examination, the expert wrote that from the surgery report it is impossible to understand exactly what was done, and recommended that R. return to the original surgeon. Only when she returned to the doctor who operated on her did it become clear to her for the first time that during the surgery a decision was made not to complete the planned procedure. The surgeon noted that after the liposuction he came to the conclusion that there was not enough excess skin in the upper abdomen and that the muscle separation was small, and therefore decided during the surgery not to perform the incision around the navel.

"This is an elective and pre-planned surgery. It is impossible to accept a situation where the surgery plan changes when the patient can no longer express her opinion, and afterwards no one explains to her what was done to her body," said Adv. Shapira.

The expert: The hernia remains, the cost of repair is up to 150 thousand shekels

According to the statement of claim, the discovery affected R. severely. It is claimed that she stopped working, began to suffer from anxiety attacks, crying, and sleep difficulties, secluded herself in her home, and dealt obsessively with the appearance of her body, while damaging her self-confidence.

At the same time, she continued to look for a solution and turned once again to Clalit Aesthetics. According to her, she was referred to the chief physician of the network, who also confirmed to her that only a partial tummy tuck had been performed. She was offered to undergo another surgery, but was told that first she must undergo a diet plan and significantly reduce her weight, then undergo another aggressive liposuction, and only later would it be possible to perform another tummy tuck. It is also claimed that R. was required to bear the costs of the corrective surgery herself.

Attached to the lawsuit was the opinion of Dr. Or Friedman, a specialist in reconstructive and aesthetic plastic surgery. He found that the umbilical hernia still exists and that above the navel there remains a separation of the abdominal muscles about three centimeters wide, alongside a bulge in the upper abdomen. In addition, he described irregularities and asymmetry in the liposuction areas.

Dr. Friedman determined that the action performed on R. does not correspond to the action described in the price quote and the consent form. The absence of a scar around the navel, alongside the absence of documentation in the surgery report for the transposition of the navel, indicate that a full tummy tuck in its accepted sense was not performed. He also noted that the hernias documented before the surgery do not receive attention in the surgery report, and that the umbilical hernia and muscle separation remained even after the procedure.

According to Dr. Friedman, correcting R.'s condition will require another complex surgery, and possibly even several interventions. He estimated the cost of the corrective procedures at about 100 to 150 thousand shekels, and noted that even after them, it cannot be guaranteed that the appearance will fully return to its previous state. He estimated R.'s permanent medical disability in the field of plastic surgery at 19%.

Attached to the lawsuit was also a psychiatric opinion by Dr. Sergio Marchevsky, who determined that following the results of the surgery and the feeling that essential details concerning it were hidden from her, R. developed an adjustment disorder. He estimated her permanent mental disability at 30%. In the lawsuit, it is claimed that R.'s weighted medical disability following the incident stands at 43.3%.

Clalit Aesthetics stated: "The network management alongside the chief physician offered a number of alternatives as a solution - all out of a desire to provide a safe, beneficial, and fair medical and professional response. Due to information security and medical confidentiality, we will not be able to detail what was offered, and we will be forced to discuss the case in court."