A woman admitted for laparoscopic hysterectomy developed breathlessness and frothing soon after surgery. Her family suspected delayed response, poor supervision and a lack of urgency, alleging that if doctors had reacted earlier — her life may have been saved. The consumer complaint that followed was layered with strong accusations: that the surgeon was absent, the ICU nurse ignored alarms, and that the patient was shifted late to a higher centre, even without a doctor in the ambulance.
The medical records, however, told a different story.
The surgery was uneventful and all pre-operative parameters were cleared. After 24 hours of ICU monitoring, she was shifted to the ward — where she later developed acute breathlessness. Investigations were carried out and pulmonary embolism with hypotension was diagnosed — a serious but recognised post-surgical complication. She was moved to ICU and referred to a tertiary centre where thoracic surgical support was available. Unfortunately, she suffered cardiac arrest en route and passed away.
The commission noted that pulmonary embolism is a rare and rapidly evolving complication that can occur even with proper precautions. More importantly, there was no expert evidence to show that protocol had been violated or that earlier referral would certainly have changed the outcome. Supreme Court precedents were cited to reiterate that medical negligence must be proven through deviation from protocol, not simply inferred from grief or delay.
The court also pointed out that the complainant had not examined the anaesthesiologist or cross-examined the hospital’s doctors, which left the allegations unsubstantiated. With the treatment records showing prompt diagnosis and referral to a higher centre, the complaint was dismissed.
IML Insight
High-risk complications demand high standards — but when records show protocol was followed, courts lean on evidence, not suspicion. In surgical cases, especially where embolism or thrombosis is involved, documentation and timely decision-making remain a doctor’s strongest defence.
Source : Order pronounced by Kerala State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission on 3rd June, 2025.