Veterinary clinic said surgery was life/death..turns out nothing was there.

Posting on behalf of my friend “Robyn” who does not have Reddit. Also, this happened in Dallas, Texas.

Robyn took her 9 month old Shitzu/Yorkie mix into the vet early Sunday morning due to excessive vomiting/heaving. Robyn also noticed that her puppy was wincing when touched on the belly. The vet clinic performed x-rays and then apparently sent the proofs out to be reviewed by a third party; a doctor returned from speaking with the third party about the X-rays and told Robyn that it was extremely urgent the dog be taken in for surgery ASAP, as it appeared there was a linear plastic object blocking her small intestines. This doctor told her there was no other option, other than to remove the blockage via surgery. A different doctor performed the surgery, WITHOUT reviewing the x-rays himself. When he cut open her stomach and small intestines, he found nothing. There was nothing in her GI tract at all, in fact. This doctor then determined that it was a “mild case of gastroenteritis” that could be cured with oral medication. When they told her that the bill for the surgery would be $4200, Robyn asked them why they didn’t do their due diligence in ensuring surgery was absolutely necessary, they came back saying that the surgery was “explorative.” Robyn would’ve never had optional surgery; in fact, she explained to them before the x-rays that this dog has commonly had some GI sensitivities, such as gastroenteritis. She confronted both doctors, and the receptionist, asking that they not charge her for a surgery that wasn’t necessary to begin with, but they told her they would “review the charges” and otherwise blew her off. When she went in to get the dog today, they said they’d take off $630 from the bill and repeated to her that it was “explorative” and that’s why the bill was still so high. She again argued that had she known it was optional, she wouldn’t have had them do it.

Robyn plans to dispute the charge on her card, but in the meantime would like to know what legal recourse she has. She demanded that they give her all the records and communications for the incident. After reviewing the radiologist’s report, the third party advised an ultrasound FIRST before surgery, but Robyn was never given the option of an ultrasound. So if they were negligent in reviewing the x-rays in-house, are they liable? Or, is the third party reviewer??

Any insight here is appreciated! (Lesson learned: Ask for things in writing before letting your animal go under the knife!)

EDIT: The main problem here is not that they performed surgery in and of itself; it’s that they did not share information with her that would’ve drastically changed the outcome. If she had known that the radiologist recommend an ultrasound to be clear, she would’ve had them do that instead of rushing to surgery. Had she known that gastroenteritis commonly shows up as a foreign object (as some have pointed out) then she would’ve pointed out that she mentioned this was something the dog had had in the past, and requested treatment for that instead.

Last EDIT: I get that it is normal practice to do exploratory surgery, to ensure the animals safety. And have recently been informed that Vets perform surgery regardless of diagnostic testing. However, the veterinarians did not make it abundantly clear that surgery was going to happen regardless, and that it could very likely not result in finding anything at all. Had this expectation been set upfront, Robyn would’ve been prepared to hear the news that they didn’t find anything, instead of being blindsided and made to feel taken advantage of. Again, the veterinarians did their job in ensuring the dog made it out alive, but they left out quite a bit of details—that I am not grateful to have learned and can thus go into the Vet’s office with the correct expectation. Reall though, I shouldn’t have needed to learn this from Reddit. And as someone that is obsessed with research, I’m shocked that doctors seem to think that owners ‘just know’ that surgery will always be the result, regardless of test results. Owners try to AVOID surgery, so if we went in with the CORRECT expectation that we can’t really ever avoid it, I doubt Veterinarians would end up with pissed off clients such as Robyn. I hope that doctors will start being more forthcoming, communicative, and empathetic with their patients. Thanks to everyone that posted!