Source · Prevention of Future Deaths

Lorraine Parker

Ref: 2025-0194 Date: 23 Apr 2025 Coroner: Heidi Connor Area: Berkshire Responses identified: 4 / 3 View PDF

A lack of guidance means surgeons don't always consider CT scans for post-abdominal surgery patients with persistently high CRP. Over-reliance on clinical judgment alone risks overlooking critical objective indicators.

Date 23 Apr 2025
56-day deadline 18 Jun 2025 est.
Responses identified 4 of 3
Hospital Death (Clinical Procedures and medical management) related deaths

Coroner's concerns

AI summary
A lack of guidance means surgeons don't always consider CT scans for post-abdominal surgery patients with persistently high CRP. Over-reliance on clinical judgment alone risks overlooking critical objective indicators.
View full coroner's concerns
1. It is clearly the case that clinical judgment is the most important factor in deciding when a patient who has undergone major abdominal surgery requires a CT scan. Surgeons will “treat the patient, not the numbers”.
2. There is currently no guidance which requires surgeons to consider scanning for patients who have undergone major abdominal surgery and whose CRP is high and not decreasing, as was the case here at the time Lorraine was discharged from hospital on 31st January 2024.
3. There may be some difficulty in creating a hard line requirement for CT scanning based on a particular CRP result, but I am concerned that there is no guidance in place for requiring a consultant to consider this – perhaps when the CRP is above a certain figure and either not decreasing or continuing to rise. Any such guidance could still allow for clinical judgement – and documenting of the reasons for that decision.
4. It is my experience that clinical judgement alone, particularly where a patient looks well “from the end of the bed” is not always sufficient in this scenario. I have seen a number of avoidable death cases in this context. The purpose of blood test results is to flag up objective areas of concern. There is much reference to chasing up CRP results in Lorraine’s records, but these do not appear to have been taken into account at the time that she was discharged from the hospital without a post-operative scan.

Responses

4 respondents
NHS England NHS / Health Body
23 Apr 2025 PDF
Noted

NHS England acknowledges concerns about guidance for surgeons regarding CT scanning after abdominal surgery but notes that clinical guidelines are primarily the responsibility of NICE and Royal Colleges. They note that Clinical Quality colleagues have been asked to engage with the relevant ICB/Trust to ensure learnings have been taken. (AI summary)

View full response
Dear Coroner, Re: Regulation 28 Report to Prevent Future Deaths – Lorraine Sandra Parker who died on 30 March 2024

Thank you for your Report to Prevent Future Deaths (hereafter “Report”) dated 23 April 2025 concerning the death of Lorraine Sandra Parker on 30 March 2024. Whilst NHS England is not specifically named as a respondent in your Report, the Report was addressed to my colleague the National Director of Patient Safety for NHS England, (and a Deputy Chief Medical Officer at the Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC)).

I am therefore responding to you in my capacity as Co-National Medical Director (Secondary Care) for NHS England, with responsibility for all Regulation 28 Reports addressed to the organisation, and would like to assure you that Dr Fowler has been sighted on your Report and has provided input into this response. In advance of responding to the specific concerns raised in your Report, I would like to express my deep condolences to Lorraine’s family and loved ones. NHS England are keen to assure the family and the Coroner that the concerns raised about Lorraine’s care have been listened to and reflected upon.

Your Report raises the concern that there is a lack of guidance for surgeons regarding CT scanning for patients who have undergone major abdominal surgery and where they have a raised C-reactive protein (CRP), which is either continuing to rise or is not decreasing. You raise that clinical judgement alone is not always sufficient in this scenario.

While NHS England notes your concerns, clinical guidelines are primarily the responsibility of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and the appropriate Royal Colleges. NHS Trusts are expected to have due regard to any clinical guidelines and to implement the appropriate local processes and/or guidance. I note that you have also addressed your Report to the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain (ACPGBI) and the Royal College of Surgeons, who are the more appropriate organisations to respond to your concerns.

NHS England has however discussed your Report with the ACPGBI, and it is agreed that there is not a requirement for further guidance to be written. CRP levels are National Medical Director for Secondary Care NHS England Wellington House 133-155 Waterloo Road London SE1 8UG

13 June 2025

commonly used as a marker to indicate or exclude evidence of leaks, including anastomotic leaks following abdominal surgery.

The following articles and guidance are relevant and may assist the Coroner further:

• ACPGBI Guidance on Prevention, Diagnosis and Management of Colorectal Anastomotic Leakage – March 2016.
• National Library of Medicine article: ‘Serum C-reactive protein is a useful marker to exclude anastomotic leakage after colorectal surgery’ dated 3 February 2020.
• ‘Early warning model to detect anastomotic leakage following colon surgery: a clinical observational study’ dated 8 October 2024.

NHS England notes the local delays in reporting experienced by Lorraine, who was sent home on 31 January 2024 without a post-operative scan despite an elevated CRP, together with the misreporting of the CT scan in February 2024. Clinical Quality colleagues in the South East region have been made aware of your Report and asked to engage with the relevant Integrated Care Board / Trust on the details of Lorraine’s case and to seek assurance that learnings have been taken.

I would also like to provide further assurances on the national NHS England work taking place around the Reports to Prevent Future Deaths. All reports received are discussed by the Regulation 28 Working Group, comprising Regional Medical Directors, and other clinical and quality colleagues from across the regions. This ensures that key learnings and insights around events, such as the sad death of Lorraine, are shared across the NHS at both a national and regional level and helps us to pay close attention to any emerging trends that may require further review and action.

Thank you for bringing these important patient safety issues to my attention and please do not hesitate to contact me should you need any further information.
Royal College of Surgeons Education
3 Jun 2025 PDF
Action Planned

The Royal College of Surgeons of England will include an anonymised educational surgical vignette relating to the death in the Confidential Reporting System for Surgery (CORESS) surgical safety feedback reports. They will also encourage the Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh to do the same. (AI summary)

View full response
Dear Madam Coroner, Thank you for providing RCS England with details in your recent issuance of a Regulation 28: Report to Prevent Future Deaths. The Chief Executive has passed this notice to me as the Vice- President responsible for patient safety. We are extremely sorry to hear of the death of Lorraine Parker and express our sincere condolences to her family _ We take note of the cautionary points made within the report, specifically, the need to take note of increasing CRP following sigmoid colectomy and bowel anastomosis for adenocarcinoma_ and the failure, in this case, to act on this to obtain appropriate imaging in a timely manner: Deterioration of the surgical patient following bowel surgery, and appropriate perioperative care is covered in the postgraduate training surgical curriculum in the Intercollegiate Surgical Curriculum Programme (often referred to as 'ISCP')_ We note that the Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland (ACPGBI) has been informed of the report and are best placed to consider the need for guidance. We will contact them to support their assessment and any dissemination of guidance or other communications_ We will ensure that a precautionary anonymised educational surgical vignette relating to this death is included in the Confidential Reporting System for Surgery (CORESS) surgical safety feedback reports published in the journals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England and circulated to our members_ We will also encourage the Royal College of Surgeons of Edinburgh to do the same Thank you for drawing our attention to this unfortunate case_
The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland
5 Jun 2025 PDF
Noted

The Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland states that existing guidance on colorectal anastomotic leak management is sufficient, referring to its 2016 guidance on post-operative CRP monitoring and subsequent radiological investigation. (AI summary)

View full response
Dear Ms Connor, Thank you for your correspondence dated 23 April 2025 in the form of Regulation 28: Report to Prevent Future Deaths. I am writing on behalf of the ACPGBI Executive Committee, which I currently Chair as President. The report has been scrutinised by me and discussed by the Executive Committee on 2 June 2025. In relation to the matters of concern raised, I attach Issues in Professional Practice Guidance on the Prevention, Diagnosis and Management of Colorectal Anastomotic Leak, produced in collaboration with ACPGBI. Although published in 2016, the guidance around post-operative CRP monitoring and triggering subsequent radiological investigation remains as pertinent to clinical practice now as it was then. Please see in particular pages 16-17, where cut off values for CRP triggering a subsequent CT scan are also considered. In addition, there have been several subsequent publications (available on Pubmed) confirming this practice. On this basis, given current guidance exists, it is the view of the ACPGBI Executive that further additional guidance from ACPGBI is not required at this time. It is not clear to the Executive whether this existing guidance was considered during the investigative process outlined.
Department of Health and Social Care Central Government
18 Jun 2025 PDF
Action Planned

While citing existing NICE guidance, the DHSC has shared details of the case with NICE's prioritisation team to consider if further action should be taken. The CQC has also passed details of the case to the relevant inspection team for Royal Berkshire Hospital. (AI summary)

View full response
Dear Ms Connor,

Thank you for the Regulation 28 report of 23rd April 2025 sent to the Department of Health and Social Care about the death of Lorraine Parker. I am replying as the Minister with responsibility for cancer policy.

Firstly, I would like to say how saddened I was to read of the circumstances of Ms Parker’s death, and I offer my sincere condolences to her family and loved ones. The circumstances your report describes are concerning and I am grateful to you for bringing these matters to my attention.

The report raises concerns over the lack of formal guidance requiring consultant surgeons to consider CT scanning for post-operative patients with persistently high or rising CRP levels, and an over-reliance on clinical judgement without sufficient consideration of objective markers such as CRP. It also notes the absence of clear documentation around decisions to use, or not use, imaging in these scenarios, and raised a broader concern that apparent clinical improvement at the bedside may mask serious post-surgical complications that could only be identified through appropriate imaging.

In preparing this response, my officials have made enquiries with colleagues across the health system, including the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE), the Care Quality Commission (CQC) and multiple teams across the Department of Health and Social Care to ensure we adequately address your concerns.

In this case, there was not one single error but multiple errors that contributed to the death of Ms Parker.

Lord Darzi’s independent report on the state of the NHS highlighted the challenges facing our health service, which is why we have launched:
• a 10-Year Health Plan to reform the NHS and make it fit for the future

• a refreshed workforce plan to ensure the NHS has the right people in the right places with the right skills to deliver the care patients need
• a National Cancer Plan for England to reduce the number of lives lost to cancer and improve patient experiences and outcomes. With regard to concerns about guidance for clinicians, the NICE guideline on colorectal cancer (NG151) aims to improve quality of life and survival for adults with colorectal cancer by providing evidence-based recommendations on the management of both local disease and metastatic (secondary) cancer. It covers which interventions should be used for different types and stages of the disease, helping to guide decisions on surgery, chemotherapy, and other treatments. The NICE guideline does not provide detailed protocols for postoperative tests or scans, and clinicians would be expected to use their judgement and follow local protocols or other relevant professional guidance. However, whilst the Department has no immediate plans to instruct NICE to produce standalone guidance on post-surgery imaging based on CRP thresholds, details of this case have been shared with colleagues in NICE’s prioritisation team to consider if further action should be taken. With regard to concerns about clinical judgement, NHS Trusts are responsible for ensuring staff are sufficiently competent to deliver care. Accordingly, the Trust in question should consider their protocols in the wake of this case. The CQC has passed details of the case to the relevant inspection team for Royal Berkshire Hospital for further consideration. I hope this response is helpful. Thank you for bringing these concerns to my attention.

Report sections

Investigation and inquest
The family requested me to refer to the deceased as Lorraine. I will reflect that in this report. I conducted an inquest into the death of Lorraine Sandra Parker which concluded on 3rd April 2025. She was 52, and died on 30th March 2024. I recorded a narrative conclusion as follows: Natural causes, contributed to by cancer, by necessary surgical treatment, and by delay in diagnosing and managing anastomotic leak, after surgery conducted on 23rd of January 2024.
Circumstances of the death
This can be summarised by my findings on the Record of Inquest as follows: Lorraine Parker had an operation for sigmoid colon cancer on 23rd of January 2024. Although there was some improvement in the patient’s clinical condition, there was a delay in investigating clinical signs and blood markers, specifically CRP results, from 27th of January 2024. Lorraine was discharged home on 31st of January 2024 with no post-operative scan and a CRP of 173. The CRP result had been increasing over the past three days before her discharge. On return to hospital on the 1st of February, her CRP had continued to rise and a CT scan was carried out. The scan was misreported as showing no anastomotic leak. It was only when faeces began to leak from her wound that the scan was re-reviewed and noted to show anastomotic leak. She was initially managed conservatively, but was then returned to theatre. Her descending colon was noted to be disintegrated. Lorraine was managed on the intensive care unit between 5th and 14th of February, and on a ward thereafter before being discharged home on 23rd of February. She was re-admitted to hospital between 12th and 15th of March, when a drain was inserted to remove a pelvic collection. When attending a routine wound review appointment on 30th of March 2024, Lorraine became suddenly unwell. The crash team attended and resuscitation efforts were carried out, but she died that day, at Royal Berkshire Hospital, Reading in Berkshire. Her cause of death was: 1a Pulmonary embolism 1b Deep Vein Thrombosis 2 Sigmoid colon adenocarcinoma (operated January 2024) I concluded that delay in diagnosing and managing anastomotic leak contributed to her death.
Copies sent to
recipients, who may have an interest in this matter2. , consultant colorectal surgeon (who acted as independent expert in this case). For the avoidance of doubt, the 2 recipients referred to in this paragraph have been copied in out of interest and are not expected to send a formal response
Inquest conclusion
Natural causes, contributed to by cancer, by necessary surgical treatment, and by delay in diagnosing and managing anastomotic leak, after surgery conducted on 23rd of January 2024.

Similar PFD reports

Shared signals

Related inquiry recommendations

Similar themes

Report details

Reference
2025-0194
Date of report
23 April 2025
Coroner
Heidi Connor
Coroner area
Berkshire

Responses identified

Responses identified 4 of 3
All listed responses identified

Organisations named in PFD reports are normally expected to respond within 56 days. Deadline: 18 Jun 2025 (estimated).

Sent to

Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain
Department of Health and Social Care
Royal College of Surgeons

Part of a series

2 reports
2025-0193 All responses identified

Source links