ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To analyze malpractice cases involving hemodialysis access to prevent future litigation and improve physician education. METHODS: Jury verdict reviews from the WESTLAW database from 1 January 2005 to 1 January 2015 were reviewed. The search terms "hemodialysis," "dialysis," "graft," "fistula," "AVG," "AVF," "arteriovenous," "catheter," "permacatheter," and "shiley" were used to compile data on the demographics of the defendant, plaintiff, allegation, complication, and verdict. RESULTS: Sixty-six cases involving the litigation pertaining to hemodialysis catheter, arteriovenous fistula (AVF) or arteriovenous grafts (AVGs) were obtained. Of these, 55% involved catheter-based hemodialysis access, 18% involved AVF, and 27% involved AVG. The most frequent physician defendants were vascular surgeons (36%), internists (14%), nephrologists (14%), general surgeons (9%), and interventional radiologists (6%). Of the patients, 38% involved were male and the average patient age was 56.3 (standard deviation (SD) = 20.1) years. Region of injury was 50% in the neck or chest, 42% in the arm, and 8% in the groin. Injury was listed as death in 79% of cases. Of the deaths, 95% involved bleeding at some point in the chain of events. The most common claims related to the cases were failure to perform the surgery or procedure safely (44%), failure to diagnose and treat in a timely manner (30%), and negligent hemodialysis treatment (11%). The most common complications cited were hemorrhage (62%), loss of function of limb (15%), and ischemia due to steal syndrome (11%). A total of 26 cases (39%) were found for the plaintiff or settled. The median award was US$463,000 with a mean of US$985,299 (SD = US$1,314,557). CONCLUSION: While popular opinion may indicate that steal syndrome is a commonly litigated complication, our data reveal that the most common injury litigated is death which may frequently be the result of a hemorrhagic episode. In addition to hemorrhage, the remaining most common complications included steal syndrome and loss of limb function. Therefore, steps to better prevent, diagnose and treat bleeding, nerve injury, and steal syndrome in a timely manner are critical to preventing hemodialysis-access-associated litigation.
Subject(s)
Arteriovenous Shunt, Surgical/legislation & jurisprudence , Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation/legislation & jurisprudence , Compensation and Redress/legislation & jurisprudence , Liability, Legal , Medical Errors/legislation & jurisprudence , Nephrologists/legislation & jurisprudence , Renal Dialysis , Adult , Aged , Arteriovenous Shunt, Surgical/adverse effects , Arteriovenous Shunt, Surgical/economics , Arteriovenous Shunt, Surgical/mortality , Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation/adverse effects , Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation/economics , Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation/mortality , Catheterization, Central Venous/adverse effects , Catheterization, Central Venous/economics , Catheterization, Central Venous/mortality , Cause of Death , Clinical Competence/legislation & jurisprudence , Databases, Factual , Female , Humans , Liability, Legal/economics , Male , Malpractice/economics , Medical Errors/economics , Medical Errors/mortality , Middle Aged , Nephrologists/economics , Renal Dialysis/adverse effects , Renal Dialysis/economics , Renal Dialysis/mortalitySubject(s)
Arteriovenous Shunt, Surgical/economics , Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation/economics , Health Care Costs , Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015/economics , Physician Incentive Plans/economics , Reimbursement, Incentive/economics , Renal Dialysis/economics , Arteriovenous Shunt, Surgical/legislation & jurisprudence , Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation/legislation & jurisprudence , Health Care Costs/legislation & jurisprudence , Humans , Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015/legislation & jurisprudence , Physician Incentive Plans/legislation & jurisprudence , Policy Making , Reimbursement, Incentive/legislation & jurisprudence , United StatesSubject(s)
Arteriovenous Shunt, Surgical/economics , Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation/economics , Episode of Care , Health Care Costs , Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015/economics , Renal Dialysis/economics , Arteriovenous Shunt, Surgical/adverse effects , Arteriovenous Shunt, Surgical/legislation & jurisprudence , Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation/adverse effects , Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation/legislation & jurisprudence , Health Care Costs/legislation & jurisprudence , Humans , Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015/legislation & jurisprudence , Renal Dialysis/adverse effects , United StatesABSTRACT
Physician-modified endovascular devices are becoming commonplace in a modern climate where innovation outpaces regulated technological advancement. Off-label use of medical devices occurs on a daily basis throughout many institutions across the United States and when performed by physicians, is both legal and unregulated. The purpose of this invited commentary is to review the regulatory, compliance, and legal issues regarding the practice of medical device modification.
Subject(s)
Aortic Aneurysm/surgery , Attitude of Health Personnel , Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation/instrumentation , Blood Vessel Prosthesis , Device Approval , Endovascular Procedures/instrumentation , Stents , United States Food and Drug Administration , Blood Vessel Prosthesis/standards , Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation/adverse effects , Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation/legislation & jurisprudence , Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation/standards , Device Approval/legislation & jurisprudence , Device Approval/standards , Diffusion of Innovation , Endovascular Procedures/adverse effects , Endovascular Procedures/legislation & jurisprudence , Endovascular Procedures/standards , Guideline Adherence , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Humans , Liability, Legal , Patient Safety , Perception , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Prosthesis Design , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Stents/standards , Treatment Outcome , United States , United States Food and Drug Administration/legislation & jurisprudence , United States Food and Drug Administration/standardsSubject(s)
Aorta/surgery , Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation/instrumentation , Blood Vessel Prosthesis , Device Approval , Endovascular Procedures/instrumentation , Stents , United States Food and Drug Administration , Blood Vessel Prosthesis/standards , Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation/adverse effects , Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation/legislation & jurisprudence , Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation/standards , Compassionate Use Trials , Device Approval/legislation & jurisprudence , Device Approval/standards , Diffusion of Innovation , Endovascular Procedures/adverse effects , Endovascular Procedures/legislation & jurisprudence , Endovascular Procedures/standards , Evidence-Based Medicine , Humans , Patient Safety , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Prosthesis Design , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Societies, Medical , Stents/standards , Treatment Outcome , United States , United States Food and Drug Administration/legislation & jurisprudence , United States Food and Drug Administration/standardsSubject(s)
Cardiovascular Agents/therapeutic use , Coated Materials, Biocompatible/therapeutic use , Coronary Thrombosis/etiology , Coronary Thrombosis/prevention & control , Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Stents/adverse effects , Advisory Committees , Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation/adverse effects , Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation/legislation & jurisprudence , Blood Vessel Prosthesis Implantation/standards , Coated Materials, Biocompatible/standards , Humans , Patient Selection , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Stents/standards , Time FactorsABSTRACT
Coronary artery disease remains a major health problem worldwide. Since introduction of percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty and stents, much progress has been made. Percutaneous coronary intervention, however, has been limited by restenosis (repeat obstruction of arteries that have been previously treated. Introduction of drug-eluting stents (DESs) in April 2003 was a major breakthrough in preventing restenosis. In March 2003, The Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions (SCAI) published a position statement on the clinical implications of DESs, recommending an evidence-based adoption strategy. Subsequently, in May 2003, SCAI formed a multidisciplinary Drug Eluting Stent (DES) Task Force to address the significant nonclinical ramifications posed by DESs: medicolegal, financial, and access to care. The Task Force included representatives from physician societies, industry, academia, the reimbursement community, and health policy organizations. The resultant report presents analyses, options, and recommendations regarding those nonclinical issues based on the collective experience and knowledge of the Task Force members. The Task Force trusts that this report will be of value to the diverse constituencies involved with introduction of this important new technology.