- Screening service deemed patient to have declined further testing due to physical condition; no recorded offer of alternative investigations such as CT scan.
- Delay from a positive FIT in February 2025 to diagnostic imaging in July 2025 prolonged care, increasing surgical complexity and potentially affecting patient outcomes.
- Coroner requires NHS England to respond within 56 days with details of actions and timetable to address concerns and prevent future deaths.
Date of report: 08/07/2026
Ref: 2026-0333
Deceased name: Marie Bell
Coroner name: Abigail Combes
Coroner Area: Sunderland
This report is being sent to: NHS England
| REGULATION 28: REPORT TO PREVENT FUTURE DEATHS | |
|---|---|
| 1 | I am Abigail Combes, His Majesty’s Assistant Coroner for the City of Sunderland. |
| 2 | This 8th day of July 2026 |
| 3 | I make this report under paragraph 7, Schedule 5, of the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 and regulations 28 and 29 of the Coroners (Investigations) Regulations 2013. |
| 4 | NHS England You are under a duty to respond to this report within 56 days of the date of this report, namely by 3rd September 2026. I, the Coroner, may extend the period if an appropriate application is made. |
| 5 | Your response must contain details of action taken or proposed to be taken, setting out the timetable for action. Otherwise, you must explain why no action is proposed. I have a duty to send a copy of your response to the Chief Coroner. Please note any links to webpages included in the response will not be checked for sensitive information prior to publication, as the information is already online. The names of those who do not respond to PFD reports are regularly published on the Chief Coroner’s webpages Non-responses to Prevention of Future Death (PFD) reports – Courts and Tribunals Judiciary. |
| 6 | Marie Bell underwent a FIT test in January 2025. The result was a positive result, which she was made aware of in February 2025 and sent for a colonoscopy. Unfortunately due to imminent hip surgery she was unable to get into the positions required for the administration of the colonoscopy, and it would appear that she was then deemed to have declined further testing from the Screening Service. She still had symptoms, but these were not recognised as being significant until July 2025, when she was referred for a CT scan which identified a mass within the abdomen. This mass was ultimately found to be cancerous following a surgical procedure and, although the mass had not significantly increased in size, the delay between February and July for the surgery meant that Marie’s abdomen was distended, and the surgery was more complicated as a result. Ultimately Marie died as a result of an error in the surgery, which was not caused by the delay, however there will be cases where the delay is of significant impact on patient outcome. The primary concern is that there seems to be an erroneous view that Marie had declined testing from the Screening Service due to a physical condition, which meant she could not have the test which was offered. There is no evidence that an alternative, such as a CT scan, was offered which |
| 7 | In my opinion unless action is taken to address the above concerns then there is a significant risk of future deaths, and I believe you have the power to take such action. |
| 8 | On 7th August 2025 I commenced an Investigation into the death of Marie Bell, aged 58 years. The Investigation concluded at the end of the Inquest on 7th July 2026. The medical cause of death was confirmed as: – On 25 July 2025 Marie Bell underwent a procedure to remove a bowel obstruction. There were no noted complications within that surgery however it would appear that during the procedure the diathermy implement has made contact with the small bowel causing a scorch and subsequent perforation which was not noted during the surgery. This perforation was not noted until Marie deteriorated on 27 July 2025 and despite surgery to repair the perforation on 28 July 2025 it was unsurvivable and she died at hospital on 29 July 2025. I gave the following narrative conclusion: – |
| 9 | On 25 July 2025 Marie Bell underwent a procedure to remove a bowel obstruction. There were no noted complications within that surgery, however, it would appear that during the procedure the diathermy implement had made contact with the small bowel causing a scorch and subsequent perforation which was not noted during the surgery. This perforation was not noted until Marie deteriorated on 27 July 2025 and, despite surgery to repair the perforation on 28 July 2025, it was unsurvivable and she died at hospital on 29 July 2025. The obstruction was directly related to a tumour, located within Marie’s bowel, which had been present in February 2025 when Marie had a positive FIT test, and therefore could have been diagnosed earlier and surgery performed earlier. The reason for not diagnosing cancer in February 2025 is that Marie was physically unable to undergo a colonoscopy due to imminent hip surgery, and the Screening Service deemed her to therefore be declining investigations rather than identifying alternative methods of investigation. This did not make a difference to the outcome for Marie but may for others. |
| 10 | During the course of the inquest I heard evidence giving rise to concern. In my opinion, there is a risk that future deaths could occur unless action is taken. In the circumstances it is my statutory duty to report to you. The MATTERS OF CONCERN are:- |
| 11 | I have a duty to send a copy of my report to every Interested Person who in my opinion should receive it. I also may send a copy of the report to any other person who I believe may find it useful or of interest. I can confirm I have sent the report to: You may make representations to me, the Coroner, about the publication of the contents of this report in line with Chief Coroner’s Prevention of Future Deaths Reports Publication Policy (2026). Any representations will be sent to the Chief Coroner alongside the report. Please refer to box 4 above for additional information relating to the publication of reports and responses. |
| 12 | His Majesty’s Assistant Coroner for the City of Sunderland |
The post Marie Bell: Prevention of future deaths report appeared first on Courts and Tribunals Judiciary.
Share Evidence Blueprint
Save to Google Notes

Search Google Scholar
Save as PDF
⭐ My Revision List

