Medical malpractice; Proximate causation; MCL 600.2912a(2); Expert testimony; Craig ex rel Craig v Oakwood Hosp; Death certificate; Use of metal staples; Metal allergy

The court held that defendants were entitled to summary disposition because plaintiff failed to establish a genuine issue of material fact as to proximate causation in this medical-malpractice action. Plaintiff alleged that defendant-doctor breached the standard of care by using metal staples after decedent’s knee replacement surgery. The court first noted that plaintiff’s only standard-of-care issue was whether the doctor “breached the standard of care by utilizing metal staples,” but plaintiff still had to prove that the alleged breach more probably than not proximately caused the death. The court held that plaintiff’s expert did not supply that proof because he “‘pointed to nothing in the record’” showing that the staples were the actual cause of the infection. The court also relied on the expert’s concessions that decedent was never diagnosed with a metal allergy, her records did not appear to show a metal-allergy notation, she had prior metal implants without problems, metal-allergy symptoms would likely have arisen within 72 hours while her symptoms appeared weeks later, and her “entire post-surgical course could be explained without reference to a metal allergy.” The court further held that neither the death certificate’s reference to sepsis secondary to an infected knee prosthesis nor later records noting reported metal and suture allergies established that, but for the use of metal staples, decedent would not have died. Because plaintiff failed to present evidence creating a reasonable basis to find causation more likely than not, summary disposition was proper. Affirmed.