Medical Malpractice Trends in Dacryocystorhinostomy and Orbital Decompression

Abstract

Background and Objective

This study aims to evaluate the medicolegal trends related to 2 common orbital surgeries: orbital decompression and dacryocystorhinostomy (DCR). These procedures are performed by ophthalmologists, otolaryngologists, and multidisciplinary teams of both specialists.

Methods

The Westlaw database was reviewed from 1980 to 2020 for medical malpractice cases involving orbital decompression and DCR surgeries. Data were compiled on plaintiff and defendant demographics, procedure performed, legal allegation, nature of injury, and verdict or settlement awards. The Ophthalmic Mutual Insurance Company was also queried for all malpractice cases pertaining to orbital decompression and DCR from 1995 to 2021.

Results

The Westlaw database included 60 cases (34 orbital decompression, 26 DCR); of these, 8 orbital decompression and 6 DCR cases met inclusion criteria. Of the 7 orbital decompression cases that were tried, a verdict in favor of the plaintiff occurred in 4 cases (57%). Of the 5 DCR cases that were tried, a verdict in favor of the plaintiff occurred in 2 cases (40%). A search of all claims at OMIC yielded 31 cases (15 orbital decompression, 16 DCR). 22 of 31 cases were either dismissed or resulted in no payment. The remainder was settled out of court, with only one case being tried and the verdict supporting the defendant.

Conclusion

Despite several thousand orbital decompressions and DCR surgeries being performed annually in the US, very few lawsuits involving these complex surgeries have gone to trial. However, of the cases that did go to trial, a relatively high proportion of verdicts for plaintiffs was observed.