Review of Malpractice Litigations Involving Vesicovaginal and Rectovaginal Fistulas Following Elective Hysterectomy for Benign Indications in the United States From 1970 to 2020.

Abstract

The aims of this study were to review malpractice litigations involving vesicovaginal and rectovaginal fistulas after elective hysterectomy for benign indications in the United States and identify the most common themes in allegations by the plaintiffs and defenses by the defendants. Using the Lexis Nexis legal database, we searched for and reviewed all U.S. malpractice litigations pertinent to this question between 1970 and 2020. Out of 82 cases that were identified and reviewed, 17 cases met our inclusion and exclusion criteria. These cases were decided between 1973 and 2019. Nine cases involved total abdominal hysterectomies, 1 involved total laparoscopic hysterectomy (TLH), 1 involved total vaginal hysterectomy (TVH), and the rest were not specified. Fifteen cases involved vesicovaginal fistulas and 2 involved rectovaginal fistulas. Three cases were ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, with monetary compensation ranging from $250,000 to $753,722 (approximately $364,120 to $1.8 million when adjusted for inflation), whereas 14 cases were ruled in favor of the defending surgeons. Common allegations were negligence in 15 cases and lack of informed consent in 2 cases. Factors that strengthened the defendants' arguments were thorough documentation, informed consent, and prompt referral to specialists. Intraoperative cystoscopy may have benefited in some cases. Thorough documentation, informed consent, and prompt referral to specialists strengthened the defendants' legal arguments. Intraoperative cystoscopy may also be beneficial.