Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Analysis of reasons for medical malpractice litigation due to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.
Arif, Haad; Razzouk, Jacob; Bohen, Daniel; Ramos, Omar; Danisa, Olumide; Cheng, Paul; Cheng, Wayne.
Affiliation
  • Arif H; School of Medicine, University of California, Riverside, Riverside, CA, USA.
  • Razzouk J; School of Medicine, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, CA, USA.
  • Bohen D; Viterbi School of Engineering, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
  • Ramos O; Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Twin Cities Spine Center, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
  • Danisa O; Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, CA, USA.
  • Cheng P; Law Offices of Paul Cheng & Associates, Pasadena, CA, USA.
  • Cheng W; Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, Jerry L Pettis Memorial Veterans Hospital, 25805 Barton Road Suite A106, Loma Linda, CA, 92354, USA.
World Neurosurg X ; 23: 100371, 2024 Jul.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38618270
ABSTRACT

Background:

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusions (ACDF) are among the most common cervical spine operations, with over 137,000 surgeries performed annually. Understanding reasons underlying malpractice pertaining to ACDF may inform physicians of practices to improve delivery of patient care and mitigate malpractice. The aim of our study was to analyze the causes and outcomes for lawsuits pertaining to ACDF.

Methods:

The Westlaw Edge and Verdict Search databases were queried for malpractice claims utilizing the keywords "anterior cervical discectomy and fusion" and "ACDF". Inclusion criteria was based on relevance of case grievance(s) to ACDF. Data collected included date of case hearing, plaintiff demographics, defendant specialty, verdict ruling, location of filed claim, monetary award, and sustained injuries.

Results:

Fifty cases were included in this study after excluding 1933 cases. Of the 50 cases, 34 (68%) resulted in a defendant outcome, 8 (16%) resulted in a plaintiff outcome, and 8 (16%) resulted in settlement. Plaintiff verdicts resulted in an average monetary payment of $9.70 million, while settlements resulted in an average payment of $2.06 million. Reasons for litigation were divided into 10 categories, most commonly improper postoperative management (20%), hardware failure (18%), intraoperative error (14%), off-label use of implants (14%), and insufficient informed consent (12%).

Conclusions:

Malpractice claims due to ACDF are associated with higher frequencies of plaintiff verdicts and higher monetary costs compared to other spinal surgery procedures. There does not appear to be supporting evidence that spinal cord neuromonitoring is mandatory for ACDF procedures from a medicolegal standpoint.
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Language: En Journal: World Neurosurg X Year: 2024 Document type: Article Affiliation country:

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Language: En Journal: World Neurosurg X Year: 2024 Document type: Article Affiliation country: