Medical malpractice: a cardiovascular perspective

Malpratice claims in cardiology and cardiac surgery: A medico-legal issue

Medical liability has become a challenge in every physician's modern practice with the consequent loss of the physician's autonomy and an increase in "defensive medicine". From this perspective, the role of Legal Medicine in assessing medical liability has become increasingly specific and a homogenization of the methods of ascertainment is increasingly necessary, since such a process can contribute to strengthening the guarantees in professional liability procedures. Focusing on malpractice claims in the field of cardiology, the complexity of the management of cardiac pathologies and the frequency of severe adverse events implies the importance of a multi-disciplinary approach, together with the application of a shared ascertainment methodology. In particular, it is essential for the forensic pathologist to collaborate with experts in cardio-pathology, cardiology and/or cardiac surgery in cases of alleged medical liability in the cardiologic field and to follow the guidelines which have been produced to assist the expert dealing with deaths reflecting cardiac disease, in order to prevent criticism of case analysis in medico-legal environments and to promote the standardization of the structure of the juridical-legislative medical malpractice lawsuits.

Review of Cardiac Malpractice Cases Involving a Trainee

Lawsuits involving medical trainees are underappreciated and poorly documented, including within cardiology-related fields. The purpose of this review was to characterize clinical characteristics and legal outcomes of cardiology- and cardiac surgery-related lawsuits involving trainees. Westlaw, an online legal research database containing legal records from around the United States, was retrospectively reviewed for malpractice cases involving medical students, residents, or fellows through November 2020. Cases included both cardiac and cardiac surgery cases. A total of 28 cases were identified, with 16 involving female patients (57%). In the 17 cases in which patient age was included, the median age was 51 years. A total of 22 (79%) cases resulted in death or permanent disability. The most common alleged errors included procedural issues (n = 14, 50%) and failure to diagnose (n = 7, 25%). A total of 14 cases (50%) ended in favor of the physicians, 9 (32%) ended in a settlement or verdict against the physician, and 5 cases had an unknown outcome. Of the 8 cases in which the settlement or verdict amount was reported, the median payment was $1,291,992 with a range of $220,507-$30,000,000. This review of cardiac and cardiac surgery malpractice cases involving a trainee suggests trainee involvement in procedures and diagnosis may confer relatively high liability risks for both trainees and their supervisors.

What Are We Really Talking About? An Organizing Framework for Types of Consultation and Their Implications for Physician Communication

Consultation amongst providers is a foundation of modern health care and one of the most frequent means of interdisciplinary communication. Accordingly, clear and efficient communication between providers and across medical specialties during consultation is essential to patient care and a collegial work environment. Traditionally, consultation requests are felt to require a clear question that falls within the purview of the consultant's expertise. However, this narrow constraint is often lacking in the real-world clinical environment and may in fact be detrimental to physician communication and patient care. In this Perspective, the authors propose an organizing framework of seven specific consultation types, which apply broadly across disciplines: ideal, obligatory, procedural, S.O.S., confirmatory, inappropriate, and curbside. The authors describe what factors define each type and the benefits and pitfalls of each. The proposed framework may help providers have more productive, efficient, and collegial conversations about patient care, which may facilitate improved work satisfaction and an enhanced learning environment.

Ischemia/Reperfusion Injury following Acute Myocardial Infarction: A Critical Issue for Clinicians and Forensic Pathologists

Acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Reperfusion strategies are the current standard therapy for AMI. However, they may result in paradoxical cardiomyocyte dysfunction, known as ischemic reperfusion injury (IRI). Different forms of IRI are recognized, of which only the first two are reversible: reperfusion-induced arrhythmias, myocardial stunning, microvascular obstruction, and lethal myocardial reperfusion injury. Sudden death is the most common pattern for ischemia-induced lethal ventricular arrhythmias during AMI. The exact mechanisms of IRI are not fully known. Molecular, cellular, and tissue alterations such as cell death, inflammation, neurohumoral activation, and oxidative stress are considered to be of paramount importance in IRI. However, comprehension of the exact pathophysiological mechanisms remains a challenge for clinicians. Furthermore, myocardial IRI is a critical issue also for forensic pathologists since sudden death may occur despite timely reperfusion following AMI, that is one of the most frequently litigated areas of cardiology practice. In this paper we explore the literature regarding the pathophysiology of myocardial IRI, focusing on the possible role of the calpain system, oxidative-nitrosative stress, and matrix metalloproteinases and aiming to foster knowledge of IRI pathophysiology also in terms of medicolegal understanding of sudden deaths following AMI.