Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-42gr6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T22:20:22.923Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

26 - Innovation in medical care: examples from surgery

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 October 2009

Randi Zlotnik Shaul
Affiliation:
Bioethicist University of Toronto, Canada
Jacob C. Langer
Affiliation:
Professor University of Toronto, Canada
Martin F. Mckneally
Affiliation:
Professor University of Toronto, Canada
Peter A. Singer
Affiliation:
University of Toronto
A. M. Viens
Affiliation:
University of Oxford
Get access

Summary

C, a newborn infant, develops persistent vomiting on the second day of life. X-rays show midgut volvulus, a condition in which the intestines have twisted around their blood supply. Surgical exploration reveals necrosis of all but 15 cm of his small bowel. The necrotic bowel is removed and total parenteral nutrition (TPN) is initiated. At one year of age, he is taking half of his nutritional needs through his intestinal tract; the other half is given intravenously. Blood chemistry tests show that he is starting to develop significant liver damage from the TPN. C's remaining small bowel has become dilated and dysfunctional. You have recently read about a new operation called the serial tapering enteroplasty (STEP), an innovative technique, which may be able to lengthen the remaining intestine and permit it to function more effectively. A surgical stapler in common use is deployed to segment the dilated bowel into a tapered, lengthened tube more closely resembling the shape of the small intestine (Kim et al., 2003). This operation, first developed in dogs, has been undertaken in a small number of infants with short bowel syndrome. It is considered a non-validated innovation by most pediatric surgeons and is not yet accepted as part of standard surgical practice. You would like to offer the procedure to your patient, but you do not think that there is time to go through the full Research Ethics Board approval process at your hospital. Your intention is to try to help, and perhaps other patients like him.[…]

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Agich, G. J. (2001). Ethics and innovation in medicine. J Med Ethics 27: 295–6.Google ScholarPubMed
American Medical Association (2005). Code of Ethics. Washington, DC: American Medical Association (http://www.ama–assn.org/ama/pub/category/2498.html) accessed 21 July 2006.Google Scholar
Bayh-Dole Act 1980. PL 96–517, Patent and Trademark Act Amendments of 1980.
Canadian Medical Association (2004). Code of Ethics. Ottawa: Canadian Medical Association (http://www.cma.ca/index.cfm/ci_id/2419/la_id/1.htm) accessed 21 July 2006.Google Scholar
Coughlin v. Kuntz (1987). 17 B.C.L.R. (2d) 365.
Frader, J. E. and Flanagan-Klygis, E. (2000). Innovation and research in pediatric surgery. Semin Pediatr Surg 10: 198–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hazelrigg, S. R., Nunchuck, S. K., and LoCicero, J., III (1993). Video Assisted Thoracic Surgery Study Group data. Ann Thorac Surg 56: 1039–43.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kim, H. B., Fauza, D., Garza, J., et al. (2003). Serial transverse enteroplasty (STEP): a novel bowel lengthening procedure. J Pediatr Surg 38: 425–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kornetsky, S. (2001). Guidelines, Concepts and Procedures for Differentiating Between Research and Innovative Therapy. Boston, MA: Children's Hospital Committee on Clinical Investigation.Google Scholar
Lantos, J. (1994). Ethical issues: how can we distinguish clinical research from innovative therapy?Am J Pediatr Hematol/Oncol 16: 72–5.Google ScholarPubMed
Leaf, D. (2005). The law of unintended consequences. Fortune Magazine 152: 250.Google ScholarPubMed
Levine, R. F. (1988). Ethics and Regulation of Clinical Research, 2nd edn. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, p. 4.Google ScholarPubMed
Lyne v. McClarty [2001] 155 Man. R (2d) 191.
McKneally, M. F. and Daar, A. S. (2003). Introducing new technologies: protecting subjects of surgical innovation and research. World J Surg 27: 930–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McKneally, M. F. and Kornetsky, S. (2003). Protecting participants in surgical innovation: Ideas and experiments from Canada and the United States. In Joint Meeting of the American Society for Bioethics and Humanities and the Canadian Bioethics Society, 25 October 2003.
Morreim, H. (2005). Research versus innovation: real differences. Am J Bioethics 5: 42–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morreim, H., Mack, M. J., Sade, R. M. (2006). Surgical innovation: too risky to remain unregulated? Ann Thorac Surg 82: 1957–65.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research (1979). The Belmont Report: Ethical Principles and Guidelines for the Protection of Human Subjects of Research. Washington, DC: Office for Protection from Research Risks.Google Scholar
Reitsma, A. M. and Moreno, J. D. (2002). Ethical regulations for innovative surgery: the last frontier?J Am Coll Surg 194: 792–801.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reitsma, A. M. and Moreno, J. D. (2005). Ethics of innovative surgery: US surgeons' definitions, knowledge, and attitudes. J Am Coll Surg 200: 103–10.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Strasberg, S. M. and Ludbrook, P. A. (2003). Who oversees innovative practice? Is there a structure that meets the monitoring needs of new techniques?J Am Coll Surg 196: 938–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilton, H., Brunch, V., and Dyonch, M. (2000). Moral decisions regarding innovation. Clin Orthopaed Relat Res 378: 44–9.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×