Prevention of Future Deaths reports · 2014

Lara Mamula

Regulation 28 report to prevent future deaths, reference 2014-0508, written 24 Nov 2014. A coroner writes one of these when an inquest reveals a risk that could cause further deaths unless something changes.

Date of report24 Nov 2014
Reference2014-0508
DeceasedLara Mamula
CoronerCaroline Sumeray
Coroner areaIsle of Wight
CategoryCommunity health care and emergency services related deaths
Organisation namedIsle of Wight NHS Trust
Sourcejudiciary.uk record · original PDF
Responses publishednone published

The report

Text extracted from the PDF text layer. Reproduced verbatim, including the scan's own layout.

REGULATION 28:  REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS 

THIS REPORT IS BEING SENT TO: 

1. 

2. 

Ambulance Service 

 – A&E Consultant and Lead with the Isle of Wight 

– Clinical Risk and Claims Manager, Isle of Wight NHS Trust 

1 

CORONER 

I am Caroline Sarah Sumeray, Senior Coroner for the Coroner Area of the Isle of Wight. 

2 

CORONER’S LEGAL POWERS 

I make this report under paragraph 7, Schedule 5, of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 

and regulations 28 and 29 of the Coroners (Investigations) Regulations 2013. 

3 

INVESTIGATION and INQUEST 

On 20th June 2013 I commenced an investigation into the death of Lara Mamula, aged 
42. The investigation concluded at the end of the inquest on 13th November 2014. The 

conclusion  of  the  inquest  was  Natural  Causes  Contributed  to  by  Neglect.  The  medical 

cause of death was found to be: 

 1a Heart Tamponade 

 1b Ruptured Dissecting Aortic Root Aneurysm 

 1c Loeys-Dietz Syndrome 

4 

CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE DEATH 

1)  Lara Mamula was born on 1st July 1970. At the time of her death, she was 42 

years of age. 

2)  On  11th  May  2011  she  presented  with  chest  pain  and  tachycardia  which  was 

treated as an emergency and she was found to have a Debakey type III aortic 

dissection. She was kept under review until it was discovered that her aneurysm 

had  progressed  and  she  then  had  planned  surgery  to  repair  her  aneurysm  on 
22nd  February  2012  which  went  well  and  she  made  a  good  post-operative 

recovery. 

1

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
  
 
 
 
 
 3)  Mrs  Mamula was  subsequently  diagnosed  with  the rare  Loeys-Dietz  syndrome 

at the Genetics Clinic on 24th July 2012. 

4)  Mrs  Mamula  remained  under  annual  review  by  the  Cardiology  Team  at 

Southampton General Hospital. 

5)  On 12th June 2013, after having been pain free for 2 years, Mrs Mamula began 

to suffer with chest pain, which she described as feeling very much like the pain 

she had felt when she was initially diagnosed with her dissection 2 years earlier. 

She  called  an  ambulance  crew  out  and  they  checked  her  over  and  could  find 

nothing  wrong  with  her,  but  with  her  previous  history  they  suggested  that  she 

could  be  taken  to  hospital  to  be  checked  over.  She  declined  their  offer,  but 

agreed that she would see her GP the next day. 

6)  On 13th June 2013, Mrs Mamula attended her GP’s practice and saw 

her GP. Mrs Mamula told her doctor about her chest pain and reiterated 

that it was the same pain which she had felt some 2 years previously. 

was  very  concerned  and  told  Mrs  Mamula  to  go  straight  to  A&E.  In  order  to 

ensure that her patient saw the right doctor in A&E, 

 telephoned ahead 

and spoke to 2 doctors, the first of whom was a physician who said that this was 

not a matter for him; the second was 

a Staff Associate Specialist 

in Surgery who agreed to see Mrs Mamula and asked that he be contacted once 

she was in A&E. 

gave Mrs Mamula a copy of her Encounter printout to 

show the doctors at the hospital. 

7)  Mrs  Mamula  attended  A&E  with  her  father.  On  arrival,  she  checked  in  at  the 

Reception Desk and was told to attend the Beacon Centre (GP practice within 

the Hospital). Upon being triaged there, it became apparent that she needed to 

be seen by a doctor in A&E, so she and her father were sent back to the A&E 

department. 

8)  Mrs  Mamula  was  seen  by 

  an  Associate  Specialist  in 

Emergency Medicine at around 15.00 hours. She told him that she had a 2 day 

history of epigastric pain radiating to her chest. He examined her and found that 

there  was  no  history  of  shortness  of  breath  or  heart  failure.  He  noted  that  she 

had had a thoracic aortic aneurysm repair 2 years earlier. 

was not told 

that she suffered from Loeys-Dietz syndrome, and indeed he had never heard of 

such a condition before. He did not recall seeing her Encounter printout which 

may have been handed in either to Reception or to the Beacon Centre. 

9) 

 initially diagnosed gastritis with possible gastro-oesophageal reflux and 

2

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 10) Crucially, the only piece of the patient’s presenting history which wasn’t passed 

on to 

 was that Mrs Mamula claimed that the pain that she was feeling 

was  the  same  pain  which  she  had  felt  back  in  2011  when  she  suffered  her 

previous aortic dissection. Had 

 been aware of this piece of information, 

his  evidence  was  that  he  would  have  ordered  a  CT  scan.  Without  that 

information  he  did  not  have  good  cause  to  do  so,  in  his  opinion. 

acknowledged  that  he  had  not  sought  out  the  CT  imaging  from  Southampton 

General Hospital as it was close to 5 p.m. and he believed that the clerical staff 

would have left for the day. It is widely acknowledged that a chest x-ray is not 

definitive  when  diagnosing  an  aortic  aneurysm,  but  a  CT  scan  is  the  “gold-

standard” way of diagnosing this condition. 

11) Mrs  Mamula  was  discharged  from  A&E  by 

  after  her  symptoms 

subsided  and  she  had  responded  well  to  her  treatment  for  gastritis.  She  was 

discharged before seeing 

 He came down to A&E later only to find 

that she’d been discharged, but even though he had had a conversation with 

 about her previous condition, he did not attempt to contact her to ask her 

to return in order that he might examine her. 

12) Mrs Mamula was told on discharge from A&E to keep taking her medications on 

a  regular  basis,  and  if  she  was  to  become  symptomatic  again,  she  should 

contact A&E again immediately. 

13) Five  days  later,  on  18th  June  2013,  Mrs  Mamula’s  husband  returned  from  his 

night shift at work and discovered his wife deceased on the floor of the lounge of 

their house. 

14) Life was pronounced extinct by a paramedic at 06.30 hours. 

5 

CORONER’S CONCERNS 

During the course of the inquest the evidence revealed matters giving rise to concern. In 

my opinion there is a risk that future deaths will occur unless action is taken. In the 

circumstances it is my statutory duty to report to you. 

3

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                  
 
 
 
 The MATTERS OF CONCERN are as follows:  –  

1.  During  the  course  of  the  evidence,  it  became  clear  that  the  Isle  of  Wight 

Ambulance  Service  did  not  appreciate  the  gravity  of  the  situation  when  they 
were called out by Mrs Mamula on 12th June 2013, inasmuch as they were not 

aware that Loeys-Dietz syndrome predisposes those who suffer from it to have 

repeated  thoracic  aortic  aneurysms  and  dissections.  Had  they  known  that  this 

condition was so grave and that Mrs Mamula was complaining of the same pain 

which  she  had  suffered  from  2  years  previously  which  was  clearly  a  very 

ominous symptom,  they  could  have  impressed on Mrs Mamula that  she  would 

have  been  much  safer  to  have  been  taken  to  hospital  at  that  point  to  be 

thoroughly  checked  out  with  a  CT  scan,  which  would  have  been  the  only 

definitive way to ascertain if she was suffering a new aortic dissection.  

6 

ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN 

In my opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and I believe you and/or 
your organisation have the power to take such action.  

7 

YOUR RESPONSE 

You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date of this report, 
namely by 19th January 2015. I, the Coroner, may extend the period. 

Your response must contain details of action taken or proposed to be taken, setting out 
the timetable for action. Otherwise you must explain why no action is proposed. 

8 

COPIES and PUBLICATION 

I  have  sent  a  copy  of  my  report  to  the  Chief  Coroner  and  to  the  following  Interested 
Persons: the family of Lara Mamula. 

I am also under a duty to send the Chief Coroner a copy of your response.  

The  Chief  Coroner  may  publish  either  or  both  in  a  complete  or  redacted  or  summary 
form. He may send a copy of this report to any person who he believes may find it useful 
or  of  interest.  You  may  make  representations  to  me,  the  Coroner,  at  the  time  of  your 
response, about the release or the publication of your response by the Chief Coroner. 

9 

H.M. Senior Coroner – Isle of Wight 

24th November 2014 

4

Related reports

Other reports by Caroline Sumeray

See all →

More reports categorised “Community health care and emergency services related deaths”

See all →

Track Isle of Wight NHS Trust

See every Prevention of Future Deaths report matching Isle of Wight NHS Trust, and how often a new one appears.

What would an alert for this have sent me? Search the full text

Free to try — the preview shows the real matches and how many arrived in the last 12 months. Your first email alert is free.

These reports are published by the Chief Coroner's office at judiciary.uk and are © Crown copyright. The text here is reproduced from the published PDF so it can be searched. If something on this page is wrong, or you are a person named in it and want it reviewed, email drcjar@gmail.com and we will act promptly.