The trend for medical malpractice claims has increased in recent years, both in the USA and in Europe. Although diagnostic radiology is not considered a high-risk field, malpractice claims in this area follow this general trend. The most common legal action taken against radiologists includes failure to diagnose, poor communication between physicians, failure to supervise technologists properly and improper procedures. Recently, the Italian Civil Supreme Court delivered a judgment (Cass. Civ., N.10158-18) regarding the liability of radiologists, stating that in radiological practice, a correct and timely execution of the diagnostic investigation is required. By contrast, the same judgment states that requesting further clinical consultations and/or the execution of in-depth diagnostic examinations are not within their duties. Considering this judgment, we report two cases of radiologist malpractice and related responsibility for negligent conduct regarding the diagnosis of thoracic aortic dissection and the prevention and management of acute aortic syndrome.

Acute aortic syndrome and radiology liability in Italy: Case reports and medico-legal considerations

Salvatore Roccuzzo
Primo
;
Cristina Mondello
Secondo
;
Ignazio Salamone;Patrizia Gualniera;Daniela Sapienza;Serena Scurria
Penultimo
;
Alessio Asmundo
Ultimo
2021-01-01

Abstract

The trend for medical malpractice claims has increased in recent years, both in the USA and in Europe. Although diagnostic radiology is not considered a high-risk field, malpractice claims in this area follow this general trend. The most common legal action taken against radiologists includes failure to diagnose, poor communication between physicians, failure to supervise technologists properly and improper procedures. Recently, the Italian Civil Supreme Court delivered a judgment (Cass. Civ., N.10158-18) regarding the liability of radiologists, stating that in radiological practice, a correct and timely execution of the diagnostic investigation is required. By contrast, the same judgment states that requesting further clinical consultations and/or the execution of in-depth diagnostic examinations are not within their duties. Considering this judgment, we report two cases of radiologist malpractice and related responsibility for negligent conduct regarding the diagnosis of thoracic aortic dissection and the prevention and management of acute aortic syndrome.
2021
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.
Pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11570/3189472
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? 0
  • Scopus 0
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact