A court in Barcelona has sentenced an insurance company of a health center to compensate the family of a patient who died on October 8, 2018 by a bleeding during a prostate cancer operation caused by tears of three arteries. The sentence, to which EL PERIÓDICO has had access, maintains that there is a “medical liability & rdquor; in the death of the patient, not so much because of the technique used, a laparoscopy, but because of the “significance of the performance & rdquor; since the bleeding begins until it is decided to perform open surgery on the man who, despite the blood transfusions carried out, died on the operating room table.
The lawsuit filed by the patient’s family, represented by the lawyer José Aznar Cortijo, from the Verdún Legal firm, argues that there was deficient medical assistance due to the lack of expertise during the prostate intervention to which JOB was subjected. cannula) for laparoscopy, tears were produced in the aorta, renal, and superior mesenteric arteries. This triple injury caused a hemorrhage that was not treated adequately or quickly enough.
According to lawyer Aznar, “it does not seem reasonable & rdquor; that during a prostate operation “three arteries located above the kidneys are perforated and, even less so that, since the injuries are so important, the bleeding will not stop with a quick intervention to avoid” the death of the patient. sentence of Court of First Instance number 38 of Barcelona It specifies that “the acute major bleeding” occurred at 10.15 am, along with hypotension, and that the following note on the anesthesiologist’s sheet dates from 10.45 am, when it is assumed that open surgery is to be performed. “Average time is a long time of bleeding & rdquor ;, being a “very urgent thing & rdquor ;, explained a judicial expert, as stated in the sentence.
The performance of doctors
The lawsuit also exposed the “manifest lack of expertise” in how the introduction of the trocar was carried out, which must be done towards the patient’s legs, since towards the head it can cause significant injuries if not done properly. The initial injury occurred in the aorta artery, at the renal level, for which reason, the lawyer insists, the only possible explanation is that the trocar is inserted obliquely. That is, from the bottom up, or in a completely straight line “from an excessively high incision.” The judge argues, however, that “the subsection or focus should not be placed on whether the cause of the injury was the wrong direction or excessive force applied in the introduction of the trocar” (cannula), but on the time it took to react to bleeding caused by tears in the arteries.
Related news
“It is not so much a question of determining whether the indication of the therapeutic technique was correct”, nor is the method of surgery chosen “important” (“it is agreed that the most appropriate for this patient was laparoscopy”), not even if it “has significant scope” as the trocal was introduced, but what is important, emphasizes the judge, are other factors that lead to “medical liability.” Specifically, the performance of doctors when bleeding begins.
The judgment highlights that “leaving aside the possible negligence” attributed by the expert witness of the deceased’s family regarding the incorrect direction in the introduction of the trocar or the excessive force used, this expert also warned that “the possible cause” of the injuries in the arteries, apart from the “excessive time in action”, it would be the maneuvers that the doctors carried out “to see the origin of the bleeding.” In the judge’s opinion, this aspect “will also imply liability & rdquor; of doctors and, therefore, to award compensation. The togado emphasizes that a judge can base his decision on “the facts that, even without being irrefutably established, appear as more plausible, that is, those that present a predominant degree of probability & rdquor ;.
Reference-www.elperiodico.com