The judges of the Heraklion Three-Member Administrative Court of First Instance, as evidenced by their decision, consider that specific actions and omissions led to the death of the unfortunate child.
Details of the decision of the Administrative Court of First Instance of three members of Heraklion compensation to their parents little melina
who died in the early morning of December 29, 2015 after a “meatball” operation, reports today Cretlive and the journalist Evangelia Kareklakis.
According to the relevant report, the Venizelio Hospital in Heraklion is obliged to pay almost half a million euros to the family of the 4-year-old boy. melina paraskaki.
The Three-member Administrative Court of First Instance of Heraklion, with a decision it issued a few days ago on the highly praised case, ruled that the errors and omissions of the hospital organs are causally linked to the death of 4-year-old Melina, for which reason the corresponding compensatory liability is established for the restoration of mental suffering suffered by close relatives of the unfortunate child.
This fact, which undoubtedly constitutes a form of claim for the parents of the 4-year-old girl -the first substantial claim in this 7.5-year-old Golgotha-, became known a few days after the Supreme Court admitted the appeal. of the competent prosecutor, giving the “green light” for the trial of the criminal part of the case in the Court of Appeal, which is expected to take place very soon.
The court thoroughly analyzes the foundations of the multi-page decision it reached, relying on the one hand on all the evidentiary material in the file (including medical opinions), on the other hand taking into account the acquittal decision of the First Tripartite Criminal Court from Heraklion, with the anesthesiologist as the defendant.
The judges of the Three-member Administrative Court of First Instance of Heraklion, as evidenced by their decision, consider that specific actions and omissions led to the death of the unfortunate child.
-In the first place, in relation to the crucial issue of the allergic reaction, which prevailed in the first instance criminal court, the Administrative Court of First Instance considers that this version was not supported by any formal pronouncement. “However, the possibility of an allergic reaction was not established by any standard findings to document it,” he states at one point. He doesn’t rule it out, but he doesn’t take it for granted either.
Very briefly, the ruling states that there were no cutaneous signs of anaphylaxis, there were no postmortem microscopic findings of allergy, while the case of acute dysfunction of the left ventricle of the heart presented by the 4-year-old boy, as a consequence of a direct attack to the myocardium in an allergy, it does not seem -it is argued- possible and the pertinent explanation is given.
– Likewise, special mention is made of the fact that at the critical moment there was no nebulizer available. “In view of the fact that postoperative bronchospasm in children who receive anesthesia for ENT operations is a frequent complication, the defendant hospital institutions should have shown greater preparation and promptness on the part of certified anesthesiologists, so that they can treat directly and in time even in life-threatening situations with the administration of salbutamol with a nebulizer, which, according to the evidence in the file, was either requested by the supervising anesthesiologist very late, around 9:30 in the morning, or arrived very late Therefore, an early intervention in the treatment of bronchospasm with the administration of bronchodilators is not possible”.
– Regarding the bronchospasm, the court decides that it was not treated directly or adequately, based on the algorithms provided for children.
“Based on these data, the court judges that the manner of treatment of the complications presented by the 4-year-old boy upon awakening, in violation of internationally recognized practices and children’s algorithms, by the organs of the defendant hospital, in combination with The fact of not receiving informed consent from the parents of the minor patient before the operation after exposing them to the possible risks of the surgery and the possible anesthetic complications due to the administration of the corresponding medications, were (given the inadequate and extemporaneous treatment of bronchospasm) opportune causes, likely to lead causally in the ordinary course of events to the induction of hypoxia and pulmonary edema, resulting in the death of Melina, which is due to multi-organ failure syndrome due to difficulty syndrome respiratory system after episodes of hypoxemia and severe hypotension (cardiogenic shock) due to bronchospasm”.
However, it is interesting to note that the court concludes as follows:
“In addition, given the degree of proof that corresponds in the administrative trial, the aforementioned causal link cannot be considered interrupted by the presumption of the existence of a severe form of anaphylaxis, resistant to the administration of adrenaline, and incapable of being treated, since on the one hand in this case not only due to bronchospasm, but also due to anaphylaxis, the generally recognized rules of medical science were followed, of which there is no doubt, namely the current protocols and algorithms for infants -children, as previously predicted, on the one hand because the case of anaphylaxis itself is not substantiated or proven by any typical findings and in this case is based only on the contradictory statements among the witnesses regarding the vital signs of the 4-year-old boy».
