because he wanted to lose a few extra pounds, but finally lost her life. The 33-year-old woman…
until then he was perfectly healthy and borderline obese, was admitted to a large hospital in Northern Greece with an incorrect indication, as suffering from “morbid obesity”, which means that you don’t have to undergo surgery, but had previously exhausted other methods for weight loss through special diet to something that is not, however, the doctor tells her.
Without any record of the introduction of the outpatient or in the emergency room, as well as professor and director of the surgical department then would do the surgery with “sachet”, for a personal fee of 5,000 euro, the unfortunate woman suffered, in and out 4 times in the surgery, because of tragic errors (the physician is not “closed” well the incision), incorrect diagnosis and estimates for the complications that followed, driven in multi-organ failure and ending dramatically after a severe infection.
The original SAD, deposits, and expert reports had not been spotted for a long time no error, except for the payment of a sum of money, which led to disciplinary and criminal procedures, but later, “they opened some mouths” and the Justice, with the toppling of the, until then, negative decisions, has done its work, by imposing a strict criminal conviction (18 months imprisonment), and a great compensation to the unfortunate family, which can exceed 600,000 euros in total, with statutory interest.
The time of the tragedy
Everything went wrong from the start and perhaps the key point for the path towards the fatal to was the fact that at the beginning of the operation revealed unforeseen technical problem with the laparoscope, broke down the lighting of the endoscope and the laparoscopic technique was converted to open, with a small incision. From there followed but an incredible series of medical errors and omissions, which are then attempted to conceal, and in the first instance, the Justice rejected the action for damages against the professor and the hospital, since she couldn’t rely on some elements. However, the complaints that followed by other physicians, with a report and the Da’s office was able to “illuminate” the case, by showing that it wasn’t just the light of the endoscope.
Fending off the opposite claims of the hospital that there was no medical responsibility, that she agreed to it all because of the vehement desire for weight loss, the court of Appeal accepted that the professor was obliged to refrain from carrying out the intervention, and to refer you to a endocrinologist and a dietician, as I have previously exhausted all the possibilities of tackling the problem with a conservative method (diet, exercise, etc.).The fact that the unfortunate woman attempted 2-3 times to make a diet, without medical supervision and assistance, then abandoning her, as usually most people do, doesn’t mean that we’ve exhausted all non-invasive methods, such as unsubstantiated displays the hospital, noted the court decision.
The first big mistake was the closure of the incision, where the collation was not good and there has been escape of the contents of the stomach, which the doctor was unable to understand in a timely manner, despite the complaints of the patient for the postoperative course and the fact that such complications were described in the book.
Contrary to what is supported, the court concluded that the collation was not done against the rules of medical science, the professor realized the escape 5 days after the initial surgery, when she had started the infection of the organism (which also was not recognized), while the problem was attempted to be tackled with three other correctional interventions (not to keep the patient in intensive care, but only for 7 hours), rather than offering to restore health, burden, and weakened still more the body of ÎµÎ½Î´Î¿Î½Î¿ÏƒÎ¿ÎºÎ¿Î¼ÎµÎ¹Î±ÎºÏŒ fungus, that although it was doable, I was diagnosed.
In the decision it is emphasized that the inflammatory state (referred to that he had tachycardia, agitation, feeling of impending death, generalized inflammation, fever, and was in the lobby for sepsis) was not dealt with in a timely manner, with the result that the onset of multi-organ failure, which led to the non reversible situation, resulting in the woman to reach the 13th day after surgery.
The court of Appeal ruled that it should be compensated close relatives for the mental suffering and anguish for the loss of the woman while the case reached the sc, which confirmed that the financial amounts should be given with statutory interest, and now remains, nearly 10 years after the tragic event, the final determination, and again by the board. Court of appeals.
Source: Journal Nation