Businesswoman, 51, who tried to sue IVF clinic 'for millions' after suffering stroke at fertility treatment 'bootcamp' that left her with vision loss loses court bid

A businesswoman who tried to sue an IVF clinic 'for millions' after suffering a stroke that left her with vision loss following 'bootcamp' fertility treatment has lost her court bid for compensation. Navkiran Dhillon-Byrne, 51, began a cycle of private IVF treatment at the Assisted Reproduction and Gynaecology Centre (ARGC) in Wimpole Street, London, in April 2018. As part of her IVF cycle, she also underwent a 'controversial' one-off 'add-on' treatment in the form of pioneering IVIg immunotherapy, designed to moderate the body's immune responses during pregnancy. Ten days after her treatment finished, Ms Dhillon-Byrne suffered a stroke which she claims has left her with ongoing vision and psychological problems. She sued the clinic and its medical director Dr Mohamed Taranissi, claiming the additional treatment caused the stroke and staff failed to give her sufficient warnings about its risks. In a claim lawyers said would have been worth 'millions,' the marketing boss said she was not properly advised about the low chance of a successful IVF outcome or the risks associated with IVIg treatment, and wouldn't have gone ahead with it if she had known. But in a judgment at Central London County Court this week, Judge Luke Ashby said she had only shown that the treatment 'possibly materially contributed to' the stroke. She had not convinced him that it probably did, meaning he rejected Mrs Dhillon-Byrne's damages claim, also finding she was properly advised by her specialists about potential risks of the 'controversial' immunotherapy. 'I acknowledge that the claimant has suffered a distressing series of events that must have been truly heart-wrenching for her and her husband,' the judge said. IVIg therapy is a type of immunotherapy that involves administering a solution of antibodies from healthy donors into a patient. It can be used to treat certain immune disorders, and some studies have shown it can improve successful birth rates in patients with a history of miscarriages - but this is still considered controversial in the medical community. During an eight-day trial, the judge heard that, after failing with previous attempts to have a baby, Ms Dhillon-Byrne had turned to the ARGC. She told the court she had been trying to bear a child since 2014 and, although she had become pregnant on three occasions, she ended up miscarrying. Ms Dhillon-Byrne, chief marketing officer at the City of London base of an international software company, said she opted for the ARGC after it was recommended by a friend who praised its high success rates. The clinic's website states staff focus on 'in-depth investigations, daily monitoring and real-time treatment adjustments' and displays the slogan 'some call it IVF bootcamp - our patients call it their miracle'. But Ms Dhillon-Byrne told the court she was not warned of the 'specific' risks of thrombosis in relation to the IVIg part of her treatment and blamed it for the stroke she suffered on April 28, 2018. Suing for negligence and breach of duty, Ms Dhillon-Byrne maintained that the clinic overestimated her chances of a successful outcome from IVF and failed to secure her 'informed consent' before commencing treatment. Had she been given a clear picture of her chances of a successful pregnancy or the risks of IVIg, she wouldn't have consented to IVF and the supplemental IVIg therapy, she claimed. In her evidence, she said she felt rushed during some of her consultations, claiming that she received scant information about the role of IVIg therapy when she raised the issue with one of the clinic's doctors. However, Clodagh Bradley KC, for the clinic and Dr Taranissi denied her claims, telling the judge that she had been given sufficient information to consent to the treatment. Despite IVIg being 'controversial' and not licensed for use in fertility treatment, she said it was reasonable for the clinic to suggest she go through with it. Giving judgment at the end of the trial, Judge Ashby accepted that Ms Dhillon-Byrne should have been told her chances of successful IVF were only up to 10 percent. But she had been given enough advice about the risks and benefits of IVIg to enable her to give 'informed consent' for the treatment, he added. 'In my judgment, a competent, respectable and reasonable body of obstetricians and gynaecologists would have offered IVIg treatment in April 2018,' he said. 'The benefits of IVIg therapy were adequately explained to her. The material risks were also sufficiently explained. 'There is a risk of thrombosis with IVF and pregnancy and she was advised of that. There is a risk of thrombosis with IVIg generally.' But he added: 'The additional risk of thrombosis as a result of IVIg was, in my view, not material in circumstances where there are no reported cases in fertility.' And he said that even had she been given 'gold standard' advice on risks and benefits, he was sure she would have gone ahead with the treatment anyway. 'In relation to medical causation, the claimant has proved only that IVIg possibly materially contributed to the stroke, not that it probably did,' he continued. 'It follows that the claim will therefore be dismissed.