McLean Thomas R
Third Millennium Consultants, LLC, Shawnee, Kansas, USA.
Am Surg. 2005 Jul;71(7):606-12.
Limited information exists on the relationship between adverse events associated with laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) and subsequent litigation. Out of 104 suits concerning LC, 18 cases were settled for 628,138 dollars; 48 cases resulted in a plaintiff's verdict with the plaintiff receiving 2,891,421 dollars; and 18 cases resulted in a surgeon's verdict. However, when multiple defendant cases were excluded, there was <20,000 dollars difference between a negotiated settlement and plaintiff's verdict. Given the minimal monetary differences between a settlement and a plaintiff's verdict, when a surgeon is the sole defendant in a malpractice case concerning LC, the surgeon should encourage their carriers not to settle before trial; as only a trial will exonerate the surgeon. However, this encouragement should be tempered when there are "red flags" that favor the plaintiff, including multiple defendants (especially a hospital), male plaintiffs, bile duct injuries, knowledgeable and well-financed plaintiff's attorneys, and certain plaintiff's venues.
关于腹腔镜胆囊切除术(LC)相关不良事件与后续诉讼之间的关系,现有信息有限。在104起涉及LC的诉讼中,18起案件以628,138美元达成和解;48起案件原告胜诉,原告获得2,891,421美元;18起案件外科医生胜诉。然而,排除多个被告的案件后,协商和解与原告胜诉之间的金额差异不到20,000美元。鉴于和解与原告胜诉之间的货币差异极小,当外科医生是LC医疗事故案件的唯一被告时,外科医生应鼓励其保险公司在审判前不要和解;因为只有审判才能使外科医生免责。然而,当存在有利于原告的“危险信号”时,这种鼓励应有所缓和,这些信号包括多个被告(尤其是医院)、男性原告、胆管损伤、知识渊博且资金雄厚的原告律师以及某些原告选择的审判地点。