Transplant lungs gave soldier cancer
A SOLDIER died after being given a pair of cancerous lungs in a hospital transplant operation.
Matthew Millington, pictured, died at his home in Brown Lees, Biddulph, after receiving the organs of a donor who is believed to have smoked between 30 and 50 roll-up cigarettes a day.
Experts from Papworth Hospital, in Cambridge, the country's main heart and lung transplant centre, yesterday told an inquest into the 31-year-old's death that, as a cancer patient, he would not then have been able to have a further pair of lungs.
An internal probe in the wake of the operation pinpointed a string of problems at the hospital, including issues with communication, record-keeping and patient handover.
And in Mr Millington's case it was recognised that a radiogist had failed to highlight the growth of a cancerous tumour.
Dr Steven Tsui, clinical director of transplant services, who was not involved in the procedure, told North Staffordshire Coroner's Court: "In this case there were a number of failures and I did not feel the team performed to the standard I would expect."
The hospital now has new systems in place.
Mr Millington was serving in Iraq with the Queen's Royal Lancers at Christmas 2005 when he was diagnosed with a lung illness.
He was subsequently given two years to live unless action was taken. He received a double lung transplant in April 2007.
But he died 10 months later as a result of damage caused by disseminated lung cancer.
A lack of communication between radiographers and consultants meant it was not until October 2007 that a tumour, which had grown from 8-9mm to 13mm between June and August 2007 was detected.
Its growth was accelerated by the immuno-suppressive drugs Mr Millington was taking to prevent his body rejecting the transplanted organ.
North Staffordshire coroner Ian Smith discounted a verdict of misadventure or neglect, recording Mr Millington had died from "complications of transplant surgery and immuno-suppressive drug treatment".
The coroner told the court: "This is the result the family wanted and at least these days there is more transparency about the way things are conducted and we are away from the old days where things would be hushed up."
3 Comments
by Lester Millington (Matthew's Father), Biddulph
Sunday, October 11 2009, 3:04AM
“I feel I must put the record straight with a few more details. Papworth Hospital did nothing wrong that had any effect on the outcome of Matthew's transplant.
It is a fact that 51% of all lungs transplanted at Papworth come from donors who smoked. Without using such lungs many more people would die without receiving a transplant. Looking at statistics of how long transplantees live following the operation shows no difference between smoking or non-smoking donors. The decision to use any lungs is based on x-rays, oxygen transfer, and deflation tests. If lungs pass these then they are deemed suitable for transplant. The lungs Matthew was given passed all the tests Papworth did, or would do today.
The 'failures', which were highlighted (by Papworth's own internal report) concerned the point at which a shadow on a CT scan was picked up. One was missed in August, and not was found until two months later when the news was broken to Matthew and his family, BUT, on looking back though the scans the tumour in August was rated at T1 N2, and even at that point was inoperable and incurable. To quote Matthew¿s own words, he asked the Papworth consultant what would the outcome have been if they had spotted the August shadows; The answer ¿You would just have known so many weeks earlier¿! As I said, nothing they did or didn¿t do had any effect on the outcome.
This is the first recorded case of a tumour that can be said to come from a donor, and would have been so small that it was undetectable by any means. It could have been dormant in the donor and remained that way, but it was the immuno-suppressant drugs that Matthew had to take that allowed this to grow. In his summing up the coroner said that no actions or omissions by the hospital were linked to Matthew¿s death, and in delivering his ¿narrative¿ verdict the hospital was not mentioned or implicated in any way.
Papworth deservedly has a reputation as the best transplant centre (so we were told when Matthew decided where to be treated), and is one of the friendliest places I know. The care is second to none and it is like being part of a large family; indeed, it was obvious that the consultants breaking the news to us were as devastated as we were. I have only praise for Papworth for everything they did for my son.”
by kel, meir
Saturday, October 10 2009, 10:18AM
“my heart goes out to this family at this sad time.
but this is the nhs all over how could they have made these mistakes everything in these situations should be checked couble checked and double checked again this poor family has lost a very loved member due to imcompitence and neglegence by the hospital.
i hope as a family you can see beyond their mistakes and some how see past all this to remember mathew as he was befor his illness and beyond the hospitals mistakes.
god be with you and support you.
kel”
by Mr Andrew Mathers, Dresden
Saturday, October 10 2009, 9:21AM
“As the recipient of a lung transplant myself, I feel for the family of Matthew and how Matthew must have felt on knowing he had got lung cancer from the transplanted lungs.
Whilst we know that a transplant is in by no means a cure, the pain and trauma that we go through, we expect to get a decent time tome out the gift of life that is bestowed on us.
Life is so very difficult for transplatees in general, I do hope that this kind of thing does not happen ever again.
My thought are with the family of Matthew now.
Andrew”