|
|
| LEGAL ACTIONS TAKEN AGAINST SARGENTI DENTISTS |
|
Since Sargenti Paste is considered below the standard of care in all states, most legal cases related to Sargenti injuries are settled out of court and therefore not available to us to post. Often these settlements are made with confidentiality clauses.
*NEW* The National Society of Dental Practitioners, Risk Management Newsletter, Volume 25, No.1
CASE: F. v. D., as reported in Confidential Report
for Attorneys.66-year-old female, Within hours after general dentist
performed root canal treatment on upper molar,
plaintiff experienced excruciating pain, burning
and throbbing in upper right cheek and eye area.
Compound used in root canal treatment, called
N2, Sargenti paste or Gold Cross paste, contained
paraformaldehyde.
INJURY: Permanent and untreatable facial nerve
injury.
Plaintiff
contended that product has never been approved
as safe and effective by FDA, and that every
dental school in the country instructs students
not to use product. Dentist contributed
$300,000; pharmacy contributed $400,000.AMOUNT: $700,000 (settlement) (CA).
It was the dentist who prescribed and applied the paste and the pharmacy that compounded the paste. Both the dentist and
pharmacist were found guilty of negligence for the injury suffered by the patient as a result of the use of the paste. Sargenti paste used as a filling compound placed in the canal in an endodontic procedure may extend
pass the apex of the canal and enter the surrounding bone. The result will be for it to cause wide spread necrosis of the bone and damage to other structures in the jaw.
|
*NEW* 2006. Lorraine M. Hellier vs . XXX, Alabama, Madison County. This case was settled. (link pending) |
|
*NEW* 1998. $700,000: Orange County Superior Court (Norwalk): Suit against general dentist and a community pharmacy (as manufacturer) of paraformaldhyde-containing root canal filler (“N2 paste”) used in connection with "Sargenti Method" of root canal which leaked into plaintiff's cheek area causing permanent pain. Evidence demonstrated that this was a disapproved, get-rich-quick scheme by certain dentists and this pharmacy. Punitive damages were allowed against the pharmacy, but not the dentist. No uncollateralized economic damages. Dentist settled for $400,000; pharmacy settled within days for another $300,000. All settlements paid by insurers. (Settled 12/98 three weeks prior to trial; handled in association with Sherre C. Sturm, Esq., Novato, California)
http://www.kapplaw.com/appeals-cases/verdicts-a-settlements
|
1992. A recent case involved a California woman who suffered permanent nerve damage to her jaw with attendant pain, numbness, and dysfunction has been settled for $75,000. A special verdict against the suppliers of the paste, Available Products, Inc. and Elbee Chemists, of $25,000 was also assessed. (Irsheid v Truong, San Francisco Superior Court, #908373) http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-9262062_ITM |
2008. Endodontic malpractice claims in Denmark 1995-2004, Bjørndal L, Reit C, Int Endod J. 2008 Sep 22
Reasons for endodontic malpractice verdicts were related to root filling quality, the use of a paraformaldehyde product and instrument fracture. |
Malpractice Risks in Dental Practice: You Should Know Where the Risks Are
An interesting statement from a dental malpractice insurance company, Dentist's Advantage. This enforces our belief that there are far more injured patients than it seems on the surface. Many Sargenti paste victims settle their cases with confidentiality clauses. There are several classes of cases that have brought extremely high settlements and awards. These include malpractice associated with the use of anesthetic agents, IV and IM sedative agents, aspirations, SBE problems, Sargenti Paste overfills, and adverse drug reactions. |
|
The plaintiff, age twenty-seven in 1984, underwent several endodontic (root-canal) procedures by her general dentist using the controversial filling material variously called Sargenti paste, N2 and RC2B. The drug has never been approved by the FDA nor the Council on Dental Therapeutics of the ADA, largely because it contains the highly toxic paraformaldehyde and lead and has never been tested for use in humans.Tissue destruction, mummification and a compromise of the local tissue's immune system capabilities results when the drug or its vapors come in contact with bone. The plaintiff's immune system became so compromised that she developed a fulminating Actinomycosis infection which resulted in the loss of half of her lower jaw, more than forty surgeries, and medical expenses over $300,000. This dental malpractice case settled for $1,000,000. |
http://www.dentalmal.com/rootcanal.html
Defendant general dentist's use of excessive root canal filling material results in permanent paresthesia of left lip and face of patient. The patient presented to her dentist with a complaint of a toothache in the lower left posterior quadrant of her mouth. The dentist performed a root canal using Sargenti N-2 paste, a root canal filling material containing paraformaldehyde. The use of excess filling material resulted in the paste invading the mandibular canal and the nerves therein causing permanent nerve damage and chronic pain the lower left quadrant .
|
1991.
Dorton vs. Landmark Dental Care of Tuscaloosa, P.C., et al, Supreme Court of Alabama, Jan 11, 1991.
Ms. Dorton suffered burning pain and numbness due to a gross overfill of Sargenti Paste into her Inferior Alveolar Nerve (IAN) channel. The dentist, Dr. Harold K. Emmons, testified that his lack of treatment or advice relevant to the extrusion of toxic root canal filling and patient's post-endodontic complications by his statement that he did not think that the paste was close enough to the IAN to cause problems and that he thought he might have inadvertently "nicked" the IAN in giving patient her injection. Her dentist placed a cotton pellet with formo-creosol (another paraformaldehyde root canal "cleaner", not intended for even temporary inclusion). She complained of numbness on the first visit proceeding this. He then filled the canal(s) with Sargenti Paste, extruding the paste out the bottom of the tooth into the nerve channel. The dentist told Ms. Dorton that "there was some excess but that I did not feel it was going to [be] any problem". He did not tell her that the extrusion consisted of Sargenti paste or mention its toxic properties. The very next morning, Ms Dorton complained of both numbness and pain. The dentist blamed the pain on "nicking" the nerve from the shot of Novocain. The pain continued to worsen, her fever, chills and sweats continued. Days later the dentist told her to double-up on her pain killers and that there was no cause for concern. She went for a second opinion from an Oral Surgeon who then called her dentist. Only then did her dentist reveal that it was Sargenti Paste. In an apparent emergency fashion, her oral surgeon performed surgery, cutting through the jawbone to open the canal and remove the material. This surgery occurred approximately 2 weeks after the procedure. The Alabama Supreme Court overturned the jury verdict for the defense and sent the case back for re-trial. The case then settled out of court.
Recent conversations with Ms. Dorton revealed that the surgery relieved the pain and 15 years later she continues to have complete numbness in her chin, lip and gums. Ms Dorton filed a complaint with the Alabama State Dental Board but never heard a response and there is no record of disciplinary action taken against Dr. Emmons. As of 2006, Dr. Emmons holds a license with the Alabama State Board.
Ms. Dorton also filed suit against the Tennessee pharmacy that sold interstate in bulk quantity to her Alabama dentist and against FDA regulations. The pharmacy settled the case. |
2002. Linda Jo Spivey and James Glen Spivey v. Joseph D James, DDS and Dr. James L. Looney, D.D.S
The evidence shows that Linda consulted Looney about a toothache. Looney determined that Linda needed a root canal. While performing the root canal, Looney injected sargenti paste (a form of formaldehyde) into the nerve canal of the affected tooth. There was a leak from the canal which resulted in permanent deadening of the nerves in Linda's jaw and face. Their claim against Looney was settled by settlement. |
|
|
Injured patients should file an adverse event report with the FDA.
Absent
reports from the public, the FDA will not realize the extent
of the dangers
of Sargent Paste. Click here to file report. Also ask
your doctor to file a
report on your behalf. Since reports are
voluntary over 90% of adverse events go unreported.