Common mistakes in Gall bladder surgery, Compensation | Digby Brown Solicitors
03332005926
(local rate, even from a mobile)

Issues affecting the Gall bladder after surgery

Gall bladder removal (cholecystectomy) is a common surgical procedure in Scottish hospitals.

The vast majority of gall bladders are removed laparascopically otherwise known as keyhole surgery. The laparoscopic method does not require a large incision.

Usually this is an outpatient procedure, which allows the patient to return home the day of surgery, and has a two or three day recovery period.

What's involved in gall bladder surgery?

In removing the gall bladder, the surgeon clips the cystic duct in two places. One is near the cystic duct’s juncture with the gallbladder, and the second is at the cystic duct’s juncture with the common bile duct. The surgeon similarly clips the cystic artery.

The surgeon then transects (cuts) the cystic duct and artery between the two clips. By transecting the cystic duct and artery, the surgeon frees the gall bladder for removal.

The surgeon must find and identify the cystic duct’s juncture with the gall bladder and the cystic duct’s juncture with the common bile duct before transecting the cystic duct. The surgeon accomplishes this by finding the gall bladder and the cystic duct juncture; and then meticulously tracing the cystic duct to its junction with the common bile duct.

The objective is to identify the cystic duct conclusively. The surgeon must not clip the cystic duct or transect it before making conclusive identification of the cystic duct.

Common mistakes in gall bladder surgery

Unfortunately, laparoscopic cholecystectomies do not always go as planned.

The most common mistake is that the surgeon clips or cuts the patient’s common bile duct instead of the cystic duct (known as iatrogenic injury). This injury usually requires extensive, complicated and painful surgery to reconstruct the patient’s biliary anatomy.

Once the patient’s biliary anatomy has been reconstructed, there will be a long period of convalescence. Even then the reconstructive surgery does not always mean that the patient is out of the woods.

After reconstructive surgery, the patient is at risk of scarring and stricturing of the reconstructed biliary tract and further reconstructive surgery. In the worst case scenario, the patient can develop liver failure and die

The basic rule is that the surgeon must conclusively identify the cystic duct before clipping or transecting. If the surgeon makes the conclusive identification, the gall bladder injury will not occur.

Often the litigation in which we are involved focuses on that one issue - that the surgeon failed to conclusively identify the cystic duct. As a result, the surgeon may have placed clips across the common bile duct, obstructing the flow of bile or transected the patient’s common bile duct, resulting in the flow of bile into the patient’s abdomen with consequent sepsis.

Unfortunately we also encounter cases where there is a delay in recognising that injury, resulting in a severely weakened patient and a more complicated and protracted recovery.

Contact our specialist medical negligence solicitors

If you would like to talk to a specialist medical negligence solicitor about your experience with gall bladder surgery, in the first instance please complete a simple Clinical Negligence form.

Please give as much detail as you can as this will assist in our ability to fully understand your circumstances and offer legal advice.

This advice is, of course, free of charge.



based on 1536 reviews
previous
  • Couldn\'t of had a better experience. If you can get lawyer I would definitely recommend going with Louise...
    Mark Murphy - 12 Jun 2019
  • Jennifer and Didby Brown were very helpful. They guided me through the whole process and keep in touch...
    Derek - 12 Jun 2019
  • I was recently involved in a non-fault road collision in which i suffered an injury to my shoulder, so...
    Michael Mcguire - 12 Jun 2019
  • Would recommend Digby Brown to friends and family if they had an unfortunate accident friendly and helpful...
    daniel nevin - 11 Jun 2019
  • From start to finish Digby Brown were right behind you. Very helpful.
    Trevor - 11 Jun 2019
  • I would have absolutely no hesitation in recommending Digby Brown Solicitors, to any
    future clients.
    The...
    Mr F Mquarrie - 10 Jun 2019
  • excellent service and good communication
    Mary - 08 Jun 2019
  • I\'m so glad I picked Digby Brown in regard to my injury claim. Andrew Bergin (Glasgow) was so professional...
    Demi - 08 Jun 2019
  • From my first initial on line enquiry to settlement, an uncomplicated, friendly and dedicated service,...
    fraser - 07 Jun 2019
  • I was delighted with the service that I received from the staff of Digby Brown when I had to pursue a...
    Isobel - 07 Jun 2019
  • I would recommend Digby Brown at every opportunity from our initial meeting to the finalisation of the...
    Stephen G McCann - 07 Jun 2019
  • They kept me informed of the progress of my case and were good at communicating legal stuff.
    John - 06 Jun 2019
  • Very helpful and professional service with a personal touch. Kept me up to date throughout the process...
    Scott - 06 Jun 2019
  • Fantastic service .
    Stuart - 06 Jun 2019
  • Fantastic service, above and beyond and always make you feel important well alistar does anyway very...
    Charlene - 06 Jun 2019
  • Fast and efficient service
    Stewart Brown - 06 Jun 2019
  • A pleasure to deal with. Very helpful and constantly in contact with updates. Highly recommended.
    Customer - 06 Jun 2019
  • Very good team, I used the Aberdeen branch and they were excellent. Kept me updated on everything that...
    david - 06 Jun 2019
  • Very good, wasn’t dissatisfied!
    Rachel - 06 Jun 2019
  • it matters to digby brown
    Christopher - 06 Jun 2019
next