Statistical AnalysisThe rates and distributions in this case series were indicated as percentages and frequencies. RESULTSThe physicians were found to be faulty in all the cases that were examined. The reason for physician fault was failure to show the necessary professional care and attention in one (4.7%) file, whereas the Objective: The aim was to evaluate the parameters that were considered by Forensic Medicine in bile duct injury as well as the issues that the physicians were found to be faulty. Material and Methods:The following parameters were investigated in 21 files that were referred to Istanbul Forensic Medicine Institute with request of expert opinion between 2008-2012; expert decisions, patient's age, gender, written patient consent, diagnosis, type of first surgery, surgical complications, timing of complication diagnosis within the scope of complication management, patient's referral timing, troubleshooting procedures and mortality rate.Results: Physicians were found to be faulty in all files. The reason for physician fault was failure to show the necessary professional care and attention in one (4.7%) file, late recognition of injury and late transfer of the patient in 20 (95.3%) files. Written consent had not been obtained in any of the files. Thirteen patients were female (61.9%) and 8 (30.1%) were male, with a mean age of 43.3 years. Nineteen patients had cholelithiasis (90.4%), and two patients (9.5%) had a mass in the head of the pancreas. Cholecystectomy was performed laparoscopically in 15 patients (78.9%), and with open surgery in 4 patients (21.1%). The Whipple procedure was performed in two patients. The diagnosis was made during the operation in one patient (4.7%), and in the post-operative period in 20 patients (95.3%). The time to diagnosis after surgery was between 3-6 days. All of the patients had been referred to third level health care facilities. The timing of transfer was 1 day in the patient who was diagnosed during the operation, and ranged between 4-10 days in those who were diagnosed postoperatively. Reasons for late referral were delays related to pending test results in 12 patients, vague signs in 3 patients, and following-up patients with the thought that the biliary fistula will heal by itself in 5 patients. Mortality was not observed in any of the examined files. Conclusion:The issues where physicians were most frequently found to be faulty were failure to obtain written patient consent, late recognition of injury and late transfer of the patient.

Cystic echinococcosis is an infectious disease that is potentially associated with the biliary tract. Of thousand cases of hydatid cysts that were successfully treated by the Örmeci method, only two presented with cholangitis subsequent to the percutaneous treatment. These cases were treated with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, and this study provides details regarding the clear fistulization of hydatid cysts into the biliary tract.

Objective: The aim of this study was to assess the risk factors and preventive measures for gossypibomas and their medico-legal implications in forensic medicine in the Turkish legal system. Material and Methods:This study involved a retrospective analysis of the records of 39 patients with gossypiboma. Records were available from the Istanbul Forensic Medicine Institution and were surveyed for faulty treatment between 2008 and 2012. Parameters such as distribution of the cases according to specializations, elective and emergency procedures, surgical procedures, radio-opaque sponge and fluoroscopy availability, routine sponge and instrument counting, number of nurses for counting, and control of the operative field by a second surgeon were investigated.Results: All cases were evaluated by the Istanbul Forensic Medicine Institute 3 rd Expertise Committee. This committee comprised of specialists from the departments of forensic medicine, orthopedics and traumatology, general surgery, neurology, internal medicine, pediatrics, chest disease, and infectious diseases. All cases were considered as poor medical practice (malpractice) and surgeons were found to be responsible. In 16 of these 39 cases (41%) emergency procedures were performed. No unexpected event was reported in any procedure. In 16 cases (41%), sponge count was performed and was reported to be complete. Operation notes were available in 16 (41%) cases. Control of the operative field was performed by 1 surgeon, and sponge and instrument count was performed by 1 scrub nurse. Radio-opaque sponge and fluoroscopy were available in 9 (23%) centers in these cases. Conclusion:Gossypiboma can be prevented not only with surgeons' care but also with adequate support of medical device and material. However, it is considered as a poor medical practice. Presence of only 1 general surgeon in the expertise committee and ignorance of the working conditions by the surgeons should be questioned.

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate the approach of Forensic Medicine Institution for recurrent laryngeal nerve injuries. In addition, parameters that were taken into consideration by Forensic Medicine Institution in the differentiation of complication and malpractice were evaluated. Material and Methods:The files of 38 patients, with recurrent laryngeal nerve injury following thyroidectomy, that were referred to Istanbul Forensic Medicine Institute with request of expert opinion between 2008-2012 were retrospectively investigated. Data regarding expert decisions, age, gender, diagnosis, hospital type, preoperative vocal cord examination, intraoperative nerve monitoring (IONM), identification of nerve injury during operation, repair of nerve during operation, and type of injury were assessed.Results: Surgeons were found to be faulty in all files with bilateral nerve injury, however, one-sided injury files were considered as a medical complication. Twenty-one (55.2%) patients were female, and 17 (44.8%) were male, with a mean age of 35,8 in women, and 34,1 in men. None of these patients had undergone preoperative vocal cord assessment. The recurrent laryngeal nerve was intraoperatively identified in 21 (55.2%) patients, while it was not seen in 17 (44.8%) patients. IONM was not applied in any patients. There was no attempt for nerve repair during any operation. Nineteen patients had unilateral, and 19 patients had bilateral nerve damage. Conclusion:Bilateral recurrent laryngeal nerve injuries are considered as malpractice, when imaging or pathology reports fail to state a cause for difficulty in nerve identification.