Commentary on "Fatal cardiac air embolism after CT-guided percutaneous needle lung biopsy medical complication or medical malpractice?"

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskriftLetterpeer review

Abstract

To differentiate between medical malpractice and expected, but rare, medical complication in a medicolegal autopsy context is often difficult. Such an assessment requires knowledge about the clinical practice associated with the procedure at hand, and that findings of the autopsy, including medical relevant information such as patient chart, radiological imaging, and statements from witnesses about the medical procedure itself, provides evidence that substantiate either conclusion. In a case report published in the journal such an assessment is discussed by presenting findings and circumstances surrounding the death of a patient during a percutaneous needle lung biopsy procedure. The authors conclude that the death was not due to medical malpractice. However, in this commentary it is highlighted that the reasoning behind the conclusion needs to be further substantiated.
OriginalsprogEngelsk
TidsskriftForensic Science, Medicine, and Pathology
ISSN1547-769X
DOI
StatusUdgivet - 26 jun. 2023
Udgivet eksterntJa

Bibliografisk note

© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.

Citationsformater