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.
ThorpeKE.The medical malpractice ‘crisis’: recent trends and the impact of state tort reforms. Health Aff2004;
W4: 20–30.
2.
TothF.Sovereigns under siege. How the medical profession is changing in Italy.Soc Sci Med2015;
136–137: 128–134.
3.
TrainaF.Medical malpractice: the experience in Italy.Clin Orthop Relat Res2009;
467: 434–442.
4.
BonettiMCirilloPMusile TanziP, et al.
An analysis of the number of medical malpractice claims and their amounts.PLoS One2016;
11: e0153362.
5.
Pukk-HärenstamBAskJBrommelsM, et al.
Analysis of 23,364 patient-generated, physician-reviewed malpractice claims from a non-tort, blame-free, national patient insurance system: lessons learned from Sweden. Qual Saf Health Care2008;
17: 259–263.
6.
StuddertDMMelloMMGawandeAA, et al.
Claims, errors, and compensation payments in medical malpractice litigation.N Engl J Med2006;
354: 2024–2033.
7.
GualnieraPMondelloCScurriaS, et al.
Experience of an Italian hospital claims management committee: a tool for extrajudicial litigations resolution.Leg Med (Tokyo)2020;
42: 101657.
8.
JenaABSeaburySLakdawallaD, et al.
Malpractice risk according to physician specialty.N Engl J Med2011;
365: 629–636.
9.
ThomsonNBPatelM.Radiology liability update: review of claims, trends, high-risk conditions and practices, and tort reform alternatives.J Am Coll Radiol2012;
9: 729–733.
10.
European Society of Radiology (ESR); American College of Radiology (ACR).European Society of Radiology (ESR) and American College of Radiology (ACR) report of the 2015 global summit on radiological quality and safety. Insights Imaging2016;
7: 481–484.
11.
HarveyHBTomovEBabayanA, et al.
Radiology malpractice claims in the United States from 2008 to 2012: characteristics and implications.J Am Coll Radiol2016;
13: 124–130.
FileniAMagnavitaN.A 12-year follow-up study of malpractice claims against radiologists in Italy.Radiol Med2006;
111: 1009–1022.
14.
HannaTNShuaibWKerchbergerJM, et al.
Inefficient resource use for patients who receive both a chest radiograph and chest CT in a single emergency department visit.J Am Coll Radiol2016;
13: 21–27.
15.
LarsonDBJohnsonLWSchnellBM, et al.
National trends in CT use in the emergency department: 1995–2007.Radiology2011;
258: 164–173.
16.
LaiVTsangWKChanWC, et al.
Diagnostic accuracy of mediastinal width measurement on posteroanterior and anteroposterior chest radiographs in the depiction of acute nontraumatic thoracic aortic dissection.Emerg Radiol2012;
19: 309–315.
17.
FatihogluEAydinSGokharmanFD, et al.
X-ray use in chest imaging in emergency department on the basis of cost and effectiveness.Acad Radiol2016;
23: 1239–1245.
18.
ConstanceJ.How to manage incidentaloma findings: today’s radiologists turn to mix of society guidelines and trusting their instincts. Radiol Bus J2017;
20: 24–27.
19.
PandharipandePZHertsDRGoreRM, et al.
Rethinking normal: benefits and risks of not reporting harmless incidental findings.J Am Coll Radiol2016;
13: 764–767.
20.
BerlinL.Contemporary risk management for radiologists.Radiographics2018;
38: 1717–1728.
21.
BaligaRRNienaberCABossoneE, et al.
The role of imaging in aortic dissection and related syndromes.JACC Cardiovasc Imaging2014;
7: 406–424.
22.
BaligaRRNeinaberCAIsselbacherEM, et al. Aortic dissection and related syndromes.
New York:
Springer, 2007.
23.
RybickiFJUdelsonJEPeacockWF, et al.
ACR/ACC/AHA/AATS/ACEP/ASNC/NASCI/SAEM/SCCT/SCMR/SCPC/SNMMI/STR/STS Appropriate utilization of cardiovascular imaging in emergency department patients with chest pain: A joint document of the American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria Committee and the American College of Cardiology Appropriate Use Criteria Task Force.J Am Coll Radiol2016;
13: e1–e29.
24.
GleesonCESpeddingRLHardingLA, et al.
The mediastinum – is it wide?Emerg Med J2001;
18: 183–185.
ErbelRAboyansVBoileauC, et al.
ESC Guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of aortic diseases: Document covering acute and chronic aortic diseases of the thoracic and abdominal aorta of the adult. The Task Force for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Aortic Diseases of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) [published correction appears in Eur Heart J. 2015 Nov 1;36(41):2779]. Eur Heart J2014;
35: 2873–2926.
27.
BossoneELaBountyTMEagleKA.Acute aortic syndromes: diagnosis and management, an update.Eur Heart J2018;
39: 739–749d.
28.
ChiappiniBSchepensMTanE, et al.
Early and late outcomes of acute type A aortic dissection: analysis of risk factors in 487 consecutive patients.Eur Heart J2005;
26: 180–186.
