Forceps Recovered After Eight Yean

Sun (Auckland), Volume IV, Issue 1022, 12 July 1930, Page 18

Forceps Recovered After Eight Yean

MURGICAL circles are keenly interested in the claim by Miss Martlia Crotch against Dr. Krnest Miles, leading London surgeon, for alleged negligence. According to the patient’s statement. Dr. Miles operated on her in 1920 for removal of a fibroid tumor. Subsequently she suffered continual illhealth, and consulted many specialists. One performed an operation In 1926, but could find no internal trouble. In 1928 an X-ray revealed a pair of five-inch forceps within her body. A French surgeon removed them by a third operation shortly after. The extraordinary feature of the case is that, according to Miss Crotch, the forceps had been in her body eight years.

The defence naturally claims that the 1926 surgeon may have left the instrument behind, and that Miss Crotch’s previous symptoms were imaginary.

To the layman, the fact that a forceps can be left behind when a patient is operated on seems a wild impossibility, but the mishap can occur quite easily. The forceps is an artery forceps, really a form of spring clip. When a small artery is cut, the forceps is applied, and twisted, which forms a practical “tie” of the coats. It is left till the operation is finished, and then removed. In a big operation where speed is paramount, there are many such clips in use, and it is the duty of the nurse or assistant to keep tally'of them. Several Australian claims of negligence have hinged on the marooning of forceps in the body. In Queensland a few years ago a woman suffering pain after* operation in hospital had the wound opened by a Newcastle surgeon, and half a forceps was recovered. She brought an action again the hospital's woman surgeon, and lost it.

Recently a similar case came up in a Sydney court. A boy operated on

for appendicitis was found a£ierw»r‘ to have a forceps left in the wowd He won the case, in spite of tl< extraordinary claim made by the defence that he had placed it there h«eelf! Two recent cases oversea* had th f same basis. A woman was operat** on in London. Three years after*®* she became ill, was operated oa»*e* a six-inch forceps found. She a* of peritonitis. The coroner found n*S; ligence, but “not gross and culpa™*The other case was a girl operated on in America in US' who, in London in 1927, was found c have an eight-inch forceps left i* body. It was located by X-ray. In law. the responsibility is ‘ surgeon, and not on his assV****lthough the latter are usually with forceps, swab, and sponge Happily for the thousand* undergo operations yearly, gent surgeon is as rare as the «*"■' man who dozes on dnty.