A nine-year Georgia malpractice suit that "embroiled the world of American gynecology in searing debate" has come to an end, although neither side is willing to disclose how the dispute was resolved, the Philadelphia Inquirer reports (Lubrano, Philadelphia Inquirer, 6/6). The suit was brought against the Stanford University gynecologic surgeons Camran and Farr Nezhat, two brothers who were once considered "pioneers" in the field of endometriosis surgery, by Stacey Mullen, a patient who accused the brothers of "grievously injur[ing]" her during an operation for endometriosis in 1991 (Russell, San Francisco Chronicle, 6/5). Mullen had alleged that the Nezhats performed a "risky experimental procedure without her consent" that left her incontinent and "vomiting feces" for years (Ostrov, San Jose Mercury News, 6/4). The procedure, called a "rectal pull-through," involves severing the blood and nerve supply to a patient's rectum so that it can be operated on outside of the body. Numerous surgeons have since denounced the procedure as "barbaric" (Philadelphia Inquirer, 6/6). According to a docket entry in Fulton County Superior Court, Mullen withdrew her lawsuit on May 24, 2002. Court records of the case remain sealed, and Mullen's attorney, Robin Loeb, "would confirm only that 'the case has been resolved'" (San Francisco Chronicle, 6/5). Neither the Nezhats -- who have "consistently denied wrongdoing" -- nor their attorney returned calls to the San Jose Mercury News.

A Professional Fall from Grace
The Nezhats came to Stanford from Georgia in 1993, "having been hailed for their innovations in the field of gynecologic surgery and the treatment of endometriosis" (San Jose Mercury News, 6/4). The two brothers were featured on ABC's "Good Morning America" and "20/20," and they were the focus of "glowing" stories in Time and Newsweek (Philadelphia Inquirer, 6/6). However, shortly after their arrival in California, two Stanford colleagues accused the Nezhats of "performing needless operations and covering up" surgical complications, and several newspaper stories reported that the brothers "withh[eld] serious complications of new surgical techniques in published journal articles." The journal Surgical Laparoscopy, Endoscopy and Percutaneous Techniques later renounced two articles about the rectal pull-through that were written by the Nezhats. Stanford University eventually revoked the brothers' medical school teaching privileges, as well as a third brother, Ceana Nezhat, and removed them from the directorship of the Stanford Endoscopy Center for Training and Technology (San Francisco Chronicle, 6/5). Throughout the controversy, the Nezhats insisted that the accusations against them were "groundless" and "rooted in professional jealousy." Several legal experts speculated that the malpractice case was resolved in a financial settlement in which the brothers paid damages to Mullen. According to Stephen Burbank, a law professor at the University of Pennsylvania, the "confidential" nature of the resolution suggests that "one of the parties is anxious not to have the terms of the settlement known" (Philadelphia Inquirer, 6/6).