Shin SH, et al. Korean J Urol. 2013 Jun;54(6):369-372. http://dx.doi.org/10.4111/kju.2013.54.6.369

Shin S, et al. J Korean Med Sci. 2018 Jan;33(9):e46. https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2018.33.e46

Shin SH, et al. Investig Clin Urol. 2017 Sep;58(5):317-323. https://doi.org/10.4111/icu.2017.58.5.317

Drug-induced anaphylaxis (DIA) is a highly paradoxical disorder involving a fatal response to medicines prescribed for therapeutic purposes. This study aimed to improve the awareness on DIA and to prevent errors through an analysis of lawsuit judgments. Sentenced judgments involving DIA from 1998 to 2017 using the database of the Korean Supreme Court Judgment System were collected. General characteristics, results, and recognized negligence of DIA litigation cases were analyzed. Of 27 lawsuit cases included, antibiotics (n = 6, 22.2%), radiocontrast media (n = 6, 22.2%), and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (n = 5, 18.5%) were the most common drugs that had caused DIA. Cardiac arrest was reported in 23 cases (85.2%). The median time interval from drug administration to diagnosis and from diagnosis to cardiac arrest were 7 (interquartile range, IQR = 0–35) and 5 minutes (IQR = 0–33), respectively, suggesting insufficient time to cope with anaphylaxis. Consequently, either death (n = 18, 66.7%) or ischemic brain injury (n = 9, 33.3%) occurred in all cases. Violation of duty of care was recognized in 19 cases (70.4%) with median awarded amount of $106,060 (IQR = $70,296–$168,363). The recognized negligence included inadequate observation after drug administration (n = 6), delayed or missed epinephrine administration (n = 6), ignoring a history of allergy or drug hypersensitivity (n = 6), and prescription error (n = 5). It is necessary to improve the awareness on DIA, because making a trivial error in any process of history taking, drug prescription and administration, observation, and/or emergency treatment may have fatal consequences that can lead to indemnity.

Possible fatal complications arising from coronary angiography (CAG), percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), and coronary artery disease itself, are likely to cause medical disputes. Presenting the current status and reasons for judgments given in lawsuits related to CAG/PCI, this study aimed to identify ways to prevent unnecessary disputes and medical malpractice suits related to CAG/PCI through lawsuit analysis. A total of 13 cases (20 judgments) found in the Supreme Court of Korea's Written Judgment Management System from 1998 to 2017 were analyzed. Coronary artery injury was the most common causative complication that led to lawsuits (n = 6, 46%). Six cases (46%) were ruled in favor of the plaintiff for violation of duty of care (n = 4) and duty of explanation (n = 2), respectively. Cases that violated duty of care included two errors in intra-procedure device manipulation, one in pre-procedure diagnosis, and one in management of post-procedure complication. Lack of explanation regarding the risk of complications was pointed out in both cases that violated duty of explanation. The average awarded amount for the damages was 114,436,064 Korean won. Physicians need not fear unfair judgments so long as they follow standard of care because the Court consistently looked at the probability, the foreseeability, and the evidence. Therefore, maintaining standard of care is important. Besides, specific, detailed, and comprehensible explanations, including the risk of complications in addition to the necessity of procedures, are important to ensure the patient clearly understands the possible risk of adverse outcomes.