Hysterectomy, the surgical removal of the uterus, is a common gynaecological procedure that gives rise to a recognizable set of malpractice claims when complications occur. Recurring allegations include injury to the bladder, ureter, or bowel during the procedure, uncontrolled bleeding, failure to recognize and manage a complication after surgery, and questions about whether the procedure was appropriately indicated and consented to.
The standard of care is established through expert evidence from gynaecology and is assessed against the operative findings and decisions at the time rather than with hindsight. Causation often turns on whether a recognized complication, such as a ureteric injury, reflects a departure from the standard of care or an inherent risk of the procedure, and on whether any delay in recognizing the complication worsened the outcome. Informed consent can be a distinct issue where the scope of the procedure or its alternatives is in dispute.
Posts tagged Hysterectomy analyze Ontario decisions involving complications of hysterectomy and related gynaecological surgery.
The Supreme Court of British Columbia dismisses a prophylactic laparoscopic hysterectomy bowel injury claim where the plaintiff led no expert evidence. Informed consent, the modified objective test, and the indispensability of expert evidence.
Ontario Superior Court finds gynecologic surgeon liable for unrecognized intraoperative bowel injury. The duty to inspect framework in laparoscopic surgery.
I represented the plaintiff in this surgical malpractice case. The trial judge found a breach of the standard of care, but the claim failed at causation.
Free, confidential consultations. Paul reviews every potential case personally and tells you honestly whether it merits investigation.