User login
A 32-year-old woman underwent laparoscopy for the treatment of endometriosis. During the course of surgery, a trocar caused a 5-mm perforation in the woman’s bowel. A general surgeon successfully repaired the injury, leaving a 3- to 4-inch scar on her abdomen.
In suing, the patient claimed that the defendant should have used a Veress needle instead of a trocar to reduce the risk of bowel injury.
The defense maintained either instrument was appropriate, and noted that such injury is a known complication of the procedure.
- The court directed a defense verdict.
A 32-year-old woman underwent laparoscopy for the treatment of endometriosis. During the course of surgery, a trocar caused a 5-mm perforation in the woman’s bowel. A general surgeon successfully repaired the injury, leaving a 3- to 4-inch scar on her abdomen.
In suing, the patient claimed that the defendant should have used a Veress needle instead of a trocar to reduce the risk of bowel injury.
The defense maintained either instrument was appropriate, and noted that such injury is a known complication of the procedure.
- The court directed a defense verdict.
A 32-year-old woman underwent laparoscopy for the treatment of endometriosis. During the course of surgery, a trocar caused a 5-mm perforation in the woman’s bowel. A general surgeon successfully repaired the injury, leaving a 3- to 4-inch scar on her abdomen.
In suing, the patient claimed that the defendant should have used a Veress needle instead of a trocar to reduce the risk of bowel injury.
The defense maintained either instrument was appropriate, and noted that such injury is a known complication of the procedure.
- The court directed a defense verdict.