Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Mammaplasties and Medicolegal Issues: 50 Cases of Litigation in Aesthetic Surgery of the Breast

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Aesthetic surgery procedures are increasing all over the world, and so are related medicolegal questions and litigation cases. Aesthetic mammaplasties represent a very important part of this field and consequently many cases of error appear. Most of these errors lead to litigation from which plastic surgeons rarely can be exonerated. The aim of this article was to evaluate different errors ascribed to the plastic surgeon, the rate of cases in which professional responsibility has been identified, and the type of guilt imputed.

Methods

Each case is based on the evaluation of both documentation used by the judge and the relationships of two specialists involved in the assessment of the presumed error. In every case, problems complained about by the patient and the eventually related error of the surgeon were analyzed. Moreover, the eventual identification of professional responsibility, the quantified damage, and its possible reduction by another corrective operation were considered.

Results

The cases studied (N = 50) were divided into 34 cases of augmentation mammaplasty, 11 cases of reduction mammaplasty, and 5 cases of mastopexy. Most of the problems complained about by patients were in the preoperative and intraoperative phases. In only 10% of the cases was the informed consent contested and an expected reduction of the damage was individuated in less than half of cases.

Conclusions

The evaluation of aesthetic damage is a tricky question due to different aspects such as the psychological component or the frequent lack of adequate photographic documentation of the patient before the operation. Moreover, whenever possible reduction of the damage is proposed, the patient’s willingness to undergo another operation, with all its related costs and benefits, must be considered.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Fiori A (2009) Legal and medical liability medicine: new aspects. Ed. Giuffrè, Milan

    Google Scholar 

  2. Annual Relation of Medical Malpractice. Italian Court of Patient’s Rights Association. Riviera del Brenta. Relation 2008: 19–44. Available at: http://www.cittadinanzattiva.it/component/content/category/25.html

  3. Buzzi F (1991) Responsibility in aesthetic surgery in light of some legal addresses of the Court of Cassation. Riv It Med Leg 13:1381

    Google Scholar 

  4. Benincasa M (1980) Legality and base of the medical-surgical activities with therapeutic goal. Riv It Dir Proc Pen fasc 3:713

    Google Scholar 

  5. Gorney M (2002) Claims prevention for the aesthetic surgeon: preparing for the less-than-perfect outcome. Facial Plast Surg 18(2):135–142

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Tebbetts JB, Tebbetts TB (2002) An approach that integrates patient education and informed consent in breast augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 110(3):971–978

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Flageul G, Horay P, Rouanet F (2009) Information and assent: presentation of 32 information cards concerning plastic and aesthetic surgery. Ann Chir Plast Esthet 54(3):181–289

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Sforza Maria Paola vs Milesi Olgiati Milena. Legal case of Italian Court. Cass. Civ., Sez. III, 25 November 1994, n. 10014. Available at: http://www.libertamedica.it/collegamenti/c_scc_16.html

  9. Sinna R, Rouanet F, Delaporte T, Flageul G, Delay E (2005) Information of the patient: the characteristics of implant breast augmentation. Ann Chir Plast Esthet 50(5):605–614

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Mavroforou A, Giannoukas A, Michalodimitrakis E (2004) Medical litigation in cosmetic plastic surgery. Med Law 23(3):479–488

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Annual Relation of Medical Malpractice. Italian Court of Patient’s Rights Association. Riviera del Brenta. Relation 2006: 32–56. Available at: http://www.cittadinanzattiva.it/component/content/category/25.html

  12. Parker R (2007) Cosmetic surgery in Australia: a risky business? J Law Med 15(1):14–18

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Hodgson J (2010) A guide to appeals within the English legal system. Br J Nurs 19(1):48–50

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Liebermeister H (2010) How to avoid liability litigation in courts – suggestions from a German example. Ger Med Sci 8

  15. Dettmeyer R, Preuss J (2009) Medical malpractice charges in Germany––a survey. Leg Med (Tokyo) 11(Suppl 1):S132–S134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Benomran F (2010) Medical responsibility in the United Arab Emirates. J Forensic Leg Med 17(4):188–193

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Chiu YC (2010) What drives patients to sue doctors? The role of cultural factors in the pursuit of malpractice claims in Taiwan. Soc Sci Med 71(4):702–707

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Kachalia A, Mello MM (2011) New directions in medical liability reform. N Engl J Med 364(16):1564–1572

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Leflar RB (2009) The regulation of medical malpractice in Japan. Clin Orthop Relat Res 467(2):443–449

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Medical Malpractice Systems around the Globe: Examples from the US- tort liability system and the Sweden- no fault system. Document of the World Bank. Russian. 2003. Report n. 29011. Available at: 194.84.38.65/files/esw_files/malpractice_systems_eng.pdf

  21. Bal BS (2009) An Introduction to Medical Malpractice in the United States. Clin Orthop Relat Res 467:339–347

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Brendel RW, Wei MH, Schouten R, Edersheim JG (2010) An approach to selected legal issues: confidentiality, mandatory reporting, abuse and neglect, informed consent, capacity decisions, boundary issues, and malpractice claims. Med Clin North Am 94(6):1229–1240

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Alexander AA (2010) Complaints, grievances, and claims against physicians: does tort reform make a difference? J Healthc Risk Manag 30(1):32–42

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Greenberg MD (2009) Medical malpractice and new devices: defining an elusive standard of care. Health Matrix Clevel 19(2):423–445

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Bal BS (2009) The expert witness in medical malpractice litigation. Clin Orthop Relat Res 467(2):383–391

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Gualdi G (1988) Doctrinaries and legal tendencies related to responsibility of plastic surgeon. Plastic and reconstructive surgery: juridical, ethical and medicolegal aspects. Ed. Giuffrè, Milan, p 19

    Google Scholar 

  27. Schiavone M (2005) Ethical, psychological and psychopathological issues in aesthetic surgery. Jura Medica 3:443–448

    Google Scholar 

  28. Bargagna M et al (2001) Guide for impairment evaluation, 3rd edn. Giuffré Editore, Milano, pp 263–266

  29. Ronchi E et al (2009) Guide for medico-legal evaluation of standing impairment. Giuffré Editore, Milano, pp 209–210

Download references

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest to declare.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. Marchesi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Marchesi, A., Marchesi, M., Fasulo, F.C. et al. Mammaplasties and Medicolegal Issues: 50 Cases of Litigation in Aesthetic Surgery of the Breast. Aesth Plast Surg 36, 122–127 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-011-9768-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-011-9768-y

Keywords

Navigation