cv) - omer ely ERLE ps STATE OF FLORIDA : . . yO ap Spe ‘DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 9 © ! : wt pag h 8 ER. Lpce ed ! a : DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, ) ) PETITIONER, ) ) v. ) CASE NO. 1995-02301 ) ; THOMAS EDWARD ROSE, M.D., ) ) ) RESPONDENT. ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT ) “coMES NOW the ” petitioner, Department of Health, hereinafter referred to as “Petitioner,” d files this Administrative Coin iplaint pefore the Board of Medicine against Thomas Edward Rose, MD., hereinafter ‘referred to as “Respondent, » and alleges: 1. Effective July 1, 1997, Petitioner is the state agency charged with regulating the practice of medicine pursuant to Section 20.43, Florida Statutes; Chapter 455, Florida Statutes, and Chapter 4 458, Florida Statutes. Pursuant to the authority of Section 20.43(3), Florida Statutes, the Petitioner + has contracted | with the Agency for Health Care Administration to provide consumer complaint, investigative and prosecutorial services required by the Division of Medical Quality Assurance, councils, or boards, as appropriate. 2. Respondent is and has been at all times material hereto a licensed physician in the state of Florida, having been issued license number ME 0055379. Respondent’s last known address is 250 Lanternback Island Drive, Satellite Beach, Florida 32937. 3. Respondent was initially licensed as a physician in the State of Florida on or about June 13, 1989. Upon information and belief, Respondent's area of specialty is cardiology. ee f Fi 4. The patient M.C., bor April 9, 1920, had an extensive cardiac history dating from 1991. She underwent cardiac catheterization in or about January, 1991, which demonstrated severe disease of the left anterior descending (LAD) coronary artery, the circumflex coronary artery, and the right coronary artery. She then underwent a percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) of the right coronary artery and the LAD; the circumflex was considered too small a vessel for angioplasty. 5. -M.C. was hospitalized for further PTCA in July, 1991, and further cardiac catheterization in December, 1992. The December, 1992 catheterization demonstrated new ba. ba lesions in the posterior descending artery and the posterolateral branch of the right coronary artery, not at the previous PTCA sites. The new lesions were considered to be 60 -t0-70% stenosis (stricture of the vessel) and 10% stenosis, respectively. The circumflex had not been previously dilated. The LAD had healed open with a 40% narrowing. M.C.’s chest pain was considered to be progressive due to progressive coronary disease. 6. In approximately July of 1994, M.C. again began having mid-sternal non-radiating chest pain. She was seen by Respondent on August 12, 1994, and underwent a thallium stress study. The study demonstrated a worsened perfusion defect in the anterior wall and a worsened defect in the inferior wall with less redistribution. M. c. then executed written authorizations for Respondent to perform cardiac catheterization and/or coronary arteriography, PTCA, and Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting (CABG) at Holmes Regional Medical Center in Melbourne, Florida on August 18, ‘1994. 7. On August 18, 1994, “Respondent performed a bilateral coronary angiography upon M.C. Respondent's s findings, as documented, included the following: 80%-to-90% narrowing in the distal right coronary artery, described as 30% narrowing following the PTCA; 30%-to-40% VW . ws narrowing in the proximal right coronary artery; 40% narrowing in the LAD; 30% narrowing in the first diagonal of the LAD, and 99% narrowing in the circumflex. Respondent performed a PICA of M.C.’s s right © coronary artery the same day. No othér cardiac procedures were performed. 8. M.C. was then discharged August 20, 1994. 9. M.C. was documented by Respondent as having a 40% proximal LAD stenosis on August 18, 1994; the coronary intervention tape indicates that the proximal LAD stenosis was 70%. In addition, Respondent had documented ischemia in the distribution of the LAD. A deasonably prudent physician would have addressed the LAD lesions on August 18, 1994, either percutaneously or by coronary artery bypass surgery. - 10. A reasonably prudent physician further would have dilated the proximal right ‘coronary art artery on August 18, 1994. 11. A reasonably prodent physician further would not have left significant lesions in coronary vessels where there were documented ischemic deficits. 12. Respondent failed to practice medicine with such level of care, skill, and treatment With regard to M C. on August 18, 1994. Specifically, Respondent failed to address the LAD lesions either percutaneously or by coronary artery bypass surgery, and failed to‘dilate the proximal right coronary artery on August 18, 1994, thus leaving signficant lesions in coronary vessels where there were documented ischemic deficits. | 13. Based on the foregoing, Respondent has violated Section 458.331(1)(t), Florida Statutes, by failing to practice medicine with that level of care, skill, and treatment which is recognized by” a reasonably prudent similar physician as being acceptable under similar conditions ‘and circumstances.. om ewe Gt ¢ c VW ‘a WHEREFORE, the Petitioner respectfully requests the Board of Medicine enter an order . imposing one or more of the following penalties: permanent revocation or suspension of the ; Respondent's s license, ‘restriction of the ‘Respondent’ s practice, imposition of an administrative fine, issuance of a reprimand, placement of the Respondent on probation, the assessment of costs *“Selated to the investigation and prosecution of this case as provided for in Section 455.624(4), Florida Statutes, and/or any other relief that the Board deems appropriate. SIGNED this YEA day of LAGRLA , 1999. Robert G. Brooks, M.D., Secretary cPherson, Jr. Chief Medical Attomey COUNSEL FOR DEPARTMENT: Larry G. McPherson, Jr. F | LED Chief Medical Attorney DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Agency for Health Care Administration DEPUTY CLERK P. O. Box 14229 cusruth Tallahassee, Florida 32317-4229 -}4-Q4 Florida Bar # 788643 DATE __RE/re | “PCP: September 8, 1999 PCP Members: Skinner, Zacharia, Rodriguez ’ eee

Docket for Case No: 00-000679