A kidney transplant that had been planned, cleared, paid for, and scheduled was cancelled barely hours before surgery — not because the donor suddenly fell ill, but because critical diagnostic information failed to reach the surgical decision-making stage in time. The consumer commission found this breakdown unacceptable.
The patient had been advised a kidney transplant and arranged for a living donor from within the family. Over the following weeks, all formalities were completed at the same hospital — diagnostic tests, imaging, compatibility assessments, and statutory certifications. A medical fitness certificate was issued confirming the donor’s suitability. On the hospital’s instructions, the patient was admitted, the transplant fee was deposited, and the surgery date was fixed.
It was only a day before the scheduled transplant that the process came to an abrupt halt. During pre-anaesthesia review, earlier CT scan findings were flagged — showing stones in both kidneys of the donor. On this basis, the transplant team refused to proceed, citing risk to both donor and recipient. The patient was discharged without surgery and asked to arrange an alternative donor.
The hospital defended the decision, arguing that no doctor is bound to proceed with a transplant if risk is detected at any stage, even at the last moment. It claimed that the CT scan report revealing stones had not been shown earlier and that cancelling the surgery was a responsible medical decision taken in the interest of safety.
The Commission was not convinced.
It noted that all investigations — including ultrasound, renal scans, and CT imaging — had been conducted within the same hospital, on the treating doctor’s advice. The CT scan showing renal calculi was done more than a month before admission. Yet, despite this, a medical fitness certificate was issued, transplant formalities were completed, and the patient was admitted without any red flag being raised.
The Commission held that the issue was not the decision to cancel the transplant, but the timing of that decision. A transplant is not an emergency procedure taken on impulse; it is a carefully planned, multi-disciplinary process. Failure to review and reconcile diagnostic findings before admission and certification amounted to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice, causing avoidable mental agony, financial strain, and loss of trust.
Compensation awarded by the District Commission for harassment and mental suffering was upheld on appeal.
IML Insight
This case makes one thing clear: clinical caution does not excuse systemic disorganisation. In complex procedures like transplants, hospitals are judged not only on surgical skill but on coordination between diagnostic, certification, and surgical teams. When internal communication breaks down, even a medically “correct” last-minute decision can still attract legal liability.
Source : Order pronounced by Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission on 14th October, 2023.