ORDERED that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of costs payable to the respondents appearing separately and filing separate briefs.
The plaintiffs failed to raise a triable issue of fact in response to the respondents' prima facie showing of their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law (see, Davenport v. County of Nassau, 279 A.D.2d 497; Ferrara v. South Shore Orthopedic Assocs., 178 A.D.2d 364; Mortensen v. Memorial Hosp., 105 A.D.2d 151). The affidavits submitted by the respondents' medical experts established that, irrespective of the delay in surgery, the severed portion of the injured plaintiff's finger could not be reattached because of severe vascular damage caused by the initial trauma. Although the affidavit of the plaintiffs' medical expert attested to certain alleged departures by the respondents, it failed to raise a triable issue of fact that reattachment would have been successful had there been no delay in surgery (see, Bossio v. Fiorillo, 210 A.D.2d 836; Fritz v. Southside Hosp., 182 A.D.2d 671; Vossler v. Amin, 175 A.D.2d 570).
Accordingly, the plaintiffs did not raise a triable issue of fact that the delay in surgery was a proximate cause of any further damage to the injured plaintiff (see, Domaradzki v. Glen Cove Ob/Gyn Assocs., 242 A.D.2d 282; Bossio v. Fiorillo, supra).