[Medicolegal aspects of primary and renal hyperparathyroidism].

BACKGROUND

Compared with malpractice claims in thyroid surgery, expert medico-legal reviews of surgery performed for hyperparathyroidism (HPT) that aim to prove or rebut surgical malpractice are rare. The aim of this analysis was to describe typical risk patterns for possible treatment errors and to generate recommendations for avoiding these treatment errors.

MATERIAL AND

METHODS

A total of 12 surgical expert medico-legal reviews, which were carried out by order of 9 arbitration boards and 3 courts between 1997 and 2020 were evaluated.

RESULTS

If the indications for surgical treatment of hyperparathyroidism were present, the failure to identify a parathyroid adenoma or hyperplastic parathyroid glands was in the majority of cases not rated as a surgical treatment error, especially in atypical localizations. Unilateral recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy and postoperative bleeding cannot always be prevented, despite maximum diligence. In contrast, bilateral recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy can be prevented when intraoperative neuromonitoring is correctly applied. A lack of patient information regarding postoperatively persistent HPT, postoperative hypoparathyroidism following the removal of inconspicuous parathyroid glands and nonindicated lobectomy or total thyroidectomy, mostly performed under the assumption of an intrathyroid parathyroid adenoma, represented avoidable malpractice issues.

CONCLUSION

Advanced knowledge of the pathophysiology of the disease and the anatomy of the parathyroid glands as well as the establishment of intraoperative and perioperative standards can prospectively greatly reduce avoidable errors in the surgical treatment and postoperative care of HPT.