Medicolegal Issues in Power Morcellation: Cautionary Rules for Gynecologists to Avoid Unfavorable Outcomes.
Female
Gynecology
/ legislation & jurisprudence
History, 20th Century
History, 21st Century
Humans
Hysterectomy
/ instrumentation
Jurisprudence
/ history
Laparoscopy
/ instrumentation
Liability, Legal
/ history
Morcellation
/ instrumentation
Physician-Patient Relations
Practice Patterns, Physicians'
/ legislation & jurisprudence
Prognosis
Sarcoma
/ diagnosis
Treatment Outcome
United States
/ epidemiology
United States Food and Drug Administration
Uterine Myomectomy
/ instrumentation
Uterine Neoplasms
/ diagnosis
Lawsuit
Leiomyosarcoma
Liability
Malignancies
Journal
Journal of minimally invasive gynecology
ISSN: 1553-4669
Titre abrégé: J Minim Invasive Gynecol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101235322
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Historique:
received:
21
03
2019
revised:
26
04
2019
accepted:
29
04
2019
pubmed:
19
1
2020
medline:
29
10
2020
entrez:
19
1
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Power morcellation in laparoscopic surgery enables specialists to carry out minimally invasive procedures such as hysterectomies and myomectomies by cutting specimens into smaller pieces using a rotating blade and removing pieces through a laparoscope. Unexpected uterine sarcoma treated by surgery involving tumor disruption could be associated with poor prognosis. The current study aims to shed light on power morcellation from a medicolegal perspective: the procedure has resulted in adverse outcomes and litigation, and compensation for plaintiffs, as published in various journals cited in PubMed and MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and GyneWeb. Considering the claims after the US Food and Drug Administration warnings on morcellation, the current study broadens the scope of research by including search engines, legal databases, and court filings (DeJure, Lexis Nexis, Justia, superior court of New Jersey, and US district court of Minnesota) between 1995 and 2019. Legal records show that courts determine professional responsibility regarding complications, making it essential to document adherence to safety protocols and specific guidelines, when available. Sound medical practices and clearly stated institute best practices result in better patient outcomes and are important when unfavorable clinical outcomes occur; adverse legal decisions can be avoided if there are grounds to prove professional conformity with specific guidelines and the unpredictability of an event.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31954185
pii: S1553-4650(20)30041-8
doi: 10.1016/j.jmig.2019.04.031
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Historical Article
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
583-592Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2020 AAGL. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.