Maryland Lawsuits AgainstAmanda N Fader, M.D.
Baltimore, MD 21287
This website does not represent the outcome of these lawsuits against Amanda N. Fader, M.D., nor does it judge the veracity of the accusations therein. In Maryland, however, all medical malpractice lawsuits require a certificate from an actively practicing doctor vouching for the merit of the lawsuit.
Amanda Nickles Fader, M.D. is a board-certified obstetrician-gynecologist who is currently practicing at Johns Hopkins Hospital. She specializes in gynecologic oncology and serves as both director of gynecologic oncology services and vice chair of gynecologic surgical operations at the hospital. Dr. Fader is internationally renowned in the field of oncology surgery and trains physicians around the world on the latest advances in clinical techniques. She has also been widely published in a variety of medical journals. Before joining the Johns Hopkins Hospital team, she was affiliated with Greater Baltimore Medical Center (GBMC). While this page is focused solely on Dr. Fader, you can find other information relating to medical malpractice lawsuits filed against Johns Hopkins Hospital here.
Based on the currently available data, Dr. Fader has been named as a co-defendant in two Maryland medical malpractice cases. The first complaint originated in 2014 while she was practicing at GBMC, while the most recent complaint was filed in 2020 and is associated with her tenure at Johns Hopkins Hospital. The entire complaint for each available case, as filed with the court, is found below.
The first available complaint against Dr. Fader lists the following allegations:
- Failing to properly perform a surgical procedure. According to the complaint, the defendant doctor performed exploratory surgery on the plaintiff to evaluate a pelvic mass. The mass was diagnosed as benign and the plaintiff was discharged from the defendant hospital a few days later. When the plaintiff returned to the defendant hospital after several months due to concerns over elevated creatinine levels in her urine, she was referred for a renal scan to evaluate her kidney function. As alleged by the plaintiff, the scan revealed several metallic surgical clips in her pelvic region that were causing kidney impairment due to improper placement by the defendant doctor.
- Failing to prevent patient injury. Per the complaint, the plaintiff endured severe complications as a result of the defendant doctors’ negligence in placing surgical clips during the exploratory procedure. Her right kidney allegedly functioned so poorly due to the error that it had to be surgically removed. As contended by the plaintiff, the removal of her kidney triggered a series of secondary medical issues, including hormonal imbalances, early onset of menopause, the loss of an ovary, and extensive scarring. These acute and permanent conditions were directly caused by the negligence of the defendant doctor in performing the plaintiff’s surgery, according to the complaint.
The second available complaint against Dr. Fader lists the following allegations:
- Failing to properly direct and supervise medical staff. According to the complaint, the plaintiff sought a hysterectomy surgery with the defendant doctor and was scheduled for the procedure. During preparations for the hysterectomy, a certified nurse anesthetist placed an IV in the plaintiff’s arm to administer medication and methylene blue dye, a staining agent used to enhance visibility of bodily fluids and tissue during surgery. After placement of the IV line, the plaintiff allegedly experienced an electric shock sensation and requested removal of the line to ensure that it was functioning properly. Although the defendant doctor was purportedly in the room when the plaintiff experienced physical discomfort with the IV line and asked that it be removed and checked, the complaint maintains that she did not compel the certified nurse anesthetist to withdraw the IV.
- Failing to prevent patient injury. Per the complaint, anesthesia was administered to the plaintiff and the surgery proceeded despite her expressed concerns with the placement of her IV line. During the hysterectomy, methylene blue was injected into the plaintiff’s body and then allegedly leaked out from her vein. As cited in the complaint, the leakage was an abnormal occurrence caused by a malfunction of the IV line. The plaintiff contends that after the surgery she experienced severe pain and swelling in her right arm due to the methylene blue dye leakage and was subsequently hospitalized in the defendant hospital’s intensive care unit. Since then she has purportedly developed chronic regional pain in her arm that requires ongoing treatment. This complication was directly caused by the negligence of the defendant doctor in ensuring the IV line was properly placed and functioning, according to the complaint.
Last updated May 14, 2021