Commentary on "Fatal cardiac air embolism after CT-guided percutaneous needle lung biopsy medical complication or medical malpractice?"

Research output: Contribution to journal › Letter › Research › peer-review

Standard

Commentary on "Fatal cardiac air embolism after CT-guided percutaneous needle lung biopsy medical complication or medical malpractice?". / Wingren, Carl Johan.

In: Forensic Science, Medicine, and Pathology, 26.06.2023.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Letter › Research › peer-review

Harvard

Wingren, CJ 2023, 'Commentary on "Fatal cardiac air embolism after CT-guided percutaneous needle lung biopsy medical complication or medical malpractice?"', Forensic Science, Medicine, and Pathology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12024-023-00667-6

APA

Wingren, C. J. (2023). Commentary on "Fatal cardiac air embolism after CT-guided percutaneous needle lung biopsy medical complication or medical malpractice?". Forensic Science, Medicine, and Pathology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12024-023-00667-6

Vancouver

Wingren CJ. Commentary on "Fatal cardiac air embolism after CT-guided percutaneous needle lung biopsy medical complication or medical malpractice?". Forensic Science, Medicine, and Pathology. 2023 Jun 26. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12024-023-00667-6

Author

Wingren, Carl Johan. / Commentary on "Fatal cardiac air embolism after CT-guided percutaneous needle lung biopsy medical complication or medical malpractice?". In: Forensic Science, Medicine, and Pathology. 2023.

Bibtex

@article{fa596028b9f94826bb051f173907ce19,

title = "Commentary on {"}Fatal cardiac air embolism after CT-guided percutaneous needle lung biopsy medical complication or medical malpractice?{"}",

abstract = "To differentiate between medical malpractice and expected, but rare, medical complication in a medicolegal autopsy context is often difficult. Such an assessment requires knowledge about the clinical practice associated with the procedure at hand, and that findings of the autopsy, including medical relevant information such as patient chart, radiological imaging, and statements from witnesses about the medical procedure itself, provides evidence that substantiate either conclusion. In a case report published in the journal such an assessment is discussed by presenting findings and circumstances surrounding the death of a patient during a percutaneous needle lung biopsy procedure. The authors conclude that the death was not due to medical malpractice. However, in this commentary it is highlighted that the reasoning behind the conclusion needs to be further substantiated.",

keywords = "Forensic pathology, Manner of death, Medical malpractice, Systemic air embolism, Cause of death, Medicolegal autopsy, Medical complication",

author = "Wingren, {Carl Johan}",

note = "{\textcopyright} 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.",

year = "2023",

month = jun,

day = "26",

doi = "10.1007/s12024-023-00667-6",

language = "English",

journal = "Forensic Science, Medicine, and Pathology",

issn = "1547-769X",

publisher = "Humana Press",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Commentary on "Fatal cardiac air embolism after CT-guided percutaneous needle lung biopsy medical complication or medical malpractice?"

AU - Wingren, Carl Johan

PY - 2023/6/26

Y1 - 2023/6/26

N2 - To differentiate between medical malpractice and expected, but rare, medical complication in a medicolegal autopsy context is often difficult. Such an assessment requires knowledge about the clinical practice associated with the procedure at hand, and that findings of the autopsy, including medical relevant information such as patient chart, radiological imaging, and statements from witnesses about the medical procedure itself, provides evidence that substantiate either conclusion. In a case report published in the journal such an assessment is discussed by presenting findings and circumstances surrounding the death of a patient during a percutaneous needle lung biopsy procedure. The authors conclude that the death was not due to medical malpractice. However, in this commentary it is highlighted that the reasoning behind the conclusion needs to be further substantiated.

AB - To differentiate between medical malpractice and expected, but rare, medical complication in a medicolegal autopsy context is often difficult. Such an assessment requires knowledge about the clinical practice associated with the procedure at hand, and that findings of the autopsy, including medical relevant information such as patient chart, radiological imaging, and statements from witnesses about the medical procedure itself, provides evidence that substantiate either conclusion. In a case report published in the journal such an assessment is discussed by presenting findings and circumstances surrounding the death of a patient during a percutaneous needle lung biopsy procedure. The authors conclude that the death was not due to medical malpractice. However, in this commentary it is highlighted that the reasoning behind the conclusion needs to be further substantiated.

KW - Forensic pathology

KW - Manner of death

KW - Medical malpractice

KW - Systemic air embolism

KW - Cause of death

KW - Medicolegal autopsy

KW - Medical complication

U2 - 10.1007/s12024-023-00667-6

DO - 10.1007/s12024-023-00667-6

M3 - Letter

C2 - 37357244

JO - Forensic Science, Medicine, and Pathology

JF - Forensic Science, Medicine, and Pathology

SN - 1547-769X

ER -

ID: 361482455

Forskning