Miami dentist accused of leaving part of a tool inside a patient’s tooth during root canal
The patient was receiving root canal treatment at the time
Support truly
independent journalism
Our mission is to deliver unbiased, fact-based reporting that holds power to account and exposes the truth.
Whether $5 or $50, every contribution counts.
Support us to deliver journalism without an agenda.
![Louise Thomas](https://static.independent.co.uk/static-assets/support-us/louise-thomas.png)
Louise Thomas
Editor
A Miami-Dade, Florida dentist has been accused of leaving part of a hand file inside a patient’s tooth during a procedure.
According to a state complaint filed against the dentist, Alberto Graupera stopped a root canal mid-way through the procedure at the request of the patient. He closed up the tooth, and did not tell the patient that part of a hand file remained inside, reports The Miami Herald. The incident occurred in September 2020.
The state complaint alleges the dentist, Mr Graupera, violated the minimum standard of care during the treatment.
The Florida Department of Health’s administrative complaint filed against the license of Mr Graupera claims that there was a disagreement between the patient and the dentist over the best course of action on the patient’s tooth.
Mr Graupera advised extraction and an implant, but the patient wanted to try a root canal to save the tooth.
According to the complaint filed earlier this month: “While [Graupera] performed the root canal, a hand file separated in tooth No. 31. [Graupera] did not notify Patient J.V. of the hand file separation in tooth No. 31.”
The complaint says Mr Graupera then perforated that tooth.
“Patient J.V. became upset during the procedure and expressed a desire to seek a second opinion,” the complaint says. “[Graupera] placed a seal on the incomplete root canal and Patient J.V. did not return to [Graupera].”
According to The Miami Herald, a member of staff at Dr Dina and Associates in Tamarac told a reporter that Mr Graupera worked there currently. It is unclear where he was employed at the time of the reported incident.
An endodontist later “identified a retained hand file instrument” near the tip of the tooth’s root “as well as the perforation of the floor of tooth No. 31’s pulpal chamber”.
Subscribe to Independent Premium to bookmark this article
Want to bookmark your favourite articles and stories to read or reference later? Start your Independent Premium subscription today.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments