Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-tn8tq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-22T01:56:19.515Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Malpractice issues in modern anaesthesiology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2008

N. Quiney  and
L. Wijayasiri
N. Quiney
Affiliation:
Department of AnaesthesiaRoyal Surrey County HospitalGuildford, UK
L. Wijayasiri*
Affiliation:
Department of AnaesthesiaFrimley Park HospitalFrimley, Surrey, UK
*
Correspondence to: Lara Wijayasiri, Department of Anaesthesia, Frimley Park Hospital, Porstmouth Road, Frimley, Surrey GU16 7UJ, UK. E-mail: l_wijayasiri@yahoo.co.uk; Tel: +1276 604161; Fax: +1276 604606

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content. As you have access to this content, full HTML content is provided on this page. A PDF of this content is also available in through the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Type
Correspondence
Information
European Journal of Anaesthesiology , Volume 25 , Issue 7 , July 2008 , pp. 598
Copyright
Copyright © European Society of Anaesthesiology 2008

EDITOR:

Malpractice issues in anaesthesiology remain a continued concern for practicing anaesthesiologists. The review by Mavroforou and colleagues [Reference Mavroforou, Stamatiou, Koutsias, Michalodimitrakis, Vretzakis and Giannoukas1] is both timely and comprehensive and will undoubtedly assist many anaesthesiologists when they attempt to provide full and informed consent to patients before their operations.

We were particularly interested in the views of Mavroforou and colleagues [Reference Mavroforou, Stamatiou, Koutsias, Michalodimitrakis, Vretzakis and Giannoukas1] on perioperative nerve injuries. Of particular interest is that this complication is one of the most commonly occurring, shows no sign of decrease in frequency and often occurs despite significant efforts to avoid it.

We have previously described a patient [Reference Wijayasiri, Batas and Quiney2] who suffered such a complication, but on further testing was found to suffer from the genetically inherited condition ‘hereditary neuropathy with liability to pressure palsies’ (HNPP). This syndrome was first described by de Jong in 1947 [Reference Stogbauer, Young, Kuhlenbaumer, De Jonghe and Timmerman3] and is characterized by monofocal nerve palsies occurring at anatomically vulnerable sites such as the wrist, elbow or lower leg. Despite this being a relatively common abnormality (occurring at about 16 per 100 000), this is the first patient described in the anaesthetic literature. Diagnosis is first suggested by nerve conduction studies and later by molecular genetic analysis.

At that time we highlighted the possibility that some patients who develop nerve palsies after an operation may in fact have HNPP. We suggested that along with other predisposing causes of postoperative neuropathy, such as alcoholism and diabetes, a diagnosis of HNPP should also be excluded.

We believe that if clinicians start to examine other potential causes of postoperative nerve injury, in particular to exclude HNPP as a precipitating factor, the incidence of claims made against anaesthesiologists may at last start to reduce.

References

1.Mavroforou, A, Stamatiou, G, Koutsias, S, Michalodimitrakis, E, Vretzakis, G, Giannoukas, AD. Malpractice issues in modern anaesthesiology. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2007; 24: 903–911.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
2.Wijayasiri, L, Batas, D, Quiney, N. Hereditary neuropathy with liability to pressure palsies and anaesthesia: peri-operative nerve injury. Anaesthesia 2006; 61: 1004–1006.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
3.Stogbauer, F, Young, P, Kuhlenbaumer, G, De Jonghe, P, Timmerman, V. Hereditary recurrent focal neuropathies: clinical and molecular features. Neurology 2000; 54: 546–551.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed