Legal: Was this hysterectomy unnecessary?
Was this hysterectomy unnecessary?
A 33-year-old Kentucky woman underwent laparoscopic surgery in 2002. After the surgery she complained to her gynecologist of vaginal bleeding. Three weeks later she had a total hysterectomy.
She then sued the gynecologist, alleging he had made an improper diagnosis and claimed there were less invasive methods to address the vaginal bleeding.
The physician claimed that less invasive methods were unsuccessful, that the patient was properly informed of the risks and consequences of hysterectomy prior to the operation, and that she had consented to the surgery. A defense verdict was returned.
Single iron infusion in late pregnancy significantly reduces anemia risk
January 22nd 2025A recent study found that a single dose of intravenous iron in the third trimester is superior to oral iron in reducing anemia rates in pregnant women, ensuring better outcomes for mother and baby.
Read More
FDA grants 510(k) clearance to cobas liat STI multiplex assay panels
Published: January 22nd 2025 | Updated: January 22nd 2025The new panels, leveraging rapid polymerase chain reaction technology, allow point of care sexually transmitted infection diagnosis in 20 minutes, enhancing targeted treatment and reducing follow-up losses.
Read More
