Comments (57) | Add a comment
Doctor in endoscopy trial testifies vials of sedative were too large
Tools
LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL
The 50-milliliter vials of anesthetic linked to a hepatitis C outbreak would have been enough to knock out a 600-pound gorilla during a colonoscopy, an anesthesiologist testified Tuesday.
Using the example to show why the large vials of propofol were unnecessary in an endoscopy center, Dr. Nicola D'Attellis said only 35 milliliters of anesthetic would be required to sedate an ape for the typical 14-minute endoscopy procedure.
"I might give him the extra 15 (milliliters)," he joked. "I wouldn't want to be the first person he sees when he wakes up."
D'Attellis, from Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles, was the first witness in the trial of Henry Chanin, who along with his wife, Lorraine, is suing Teva Parenteral Medicine and Baxter Healthcare Services on several product liability claims.
Chanin, headmaster at The Meadows School, was infected with hepatitis C during a 2006 colonoscopy at the Desert Shadow Endoscopy Center, one of the clinics linked to Southern Nevada's hepatitis C outbreak.
Public health officials said the outbreak was caused by nurse anesthetists using single-dose medicine vials among patients after the vials had become contaminated by nurses reusing syringes on the same patient.
The lawsuit claims the companies made and sold vials of propofol that were much larger than needed for colonoscopies, which tempted medical workers to reuse vials among patients instead of throwing away unused anesthetic.
Testifying on behalf of the Chanins, D'Attellis told the jury that the typical procedures at the endoscopy centers would require between 10 and 20 milliliters of propofol, which is based on a patient's weight and the length of the procedure.
Chanin's 17.5-minute colonoscopy required 25 milliliters.
No endoscopy center should ever use 50 milliliter vials because medical workers would be tempted to reuse vials between patients instead of throwing away unused anesthetic, D'Attellis said.
"There is no place for this in an endoscopy center," he said, holding a 50 milliliter vial.
At Cedars-Sinai, 50 milliliter vials are banned from all surgery areas to avoid their misuse, he said. The larger bottles are only used for long-term sedation in intensive care units, he said.
In a videotaped deposition, Teva executive Craig Lea said the company knew the risks of the larger vials when it sought federal approval to make the 10 milliliter vials in 2000. Lea said the smaller vials would be safer and reduce the temptation to reuse a vial between patients.
Based on that knowledge, the company never should have supplied the larger vials to endoscopy centers, D'Attellis testified.
"They knew what the risk was, and they did it anyway," he said.
The lawsuit originally named the doctors and nurses who performed Henry Chanin's endoscopy, but their insurance company settled the medical malpractice claim last month.
Contact reporter Brian Haynes at bhaynes@review journal.com or 702-383-0281.
Comments
Terms & Conditions
The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The Review-Journal does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please use the Report Abuse button.
Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 24 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
Note: Comments made by reporters and editors of the Las Vegas Review-Journal are presented with a yellow background.
RSS
Twitter
Facebook
can we find out what action has being take by the attorneys in the class acton suit? they will not divulge this.
You know, "The Truth Detector", I've spent three posts trying to explain why it is, legally speaking, why Teva is going to lose the case, and you've spent at least that many questioning who I am, or what I do.
I don't see how that is getting at the heart of the matter here, and I understand that you have a very limited understanding of the law, but that is the issue; the LAW.
So, here's a way for us to get back to the real issue; you explain to me what the law says, and why it is that Teva shouldn't be liable, under the law. Cause otherwise, this is just you being overly emotional about something apparently near and dear to you, without any tie to the real issue, which again, is the law.
Good luck with your search by the way.
Guys:
I appreciate the emotions that you have, but I'm talking law here.
When you have executives from Teva ADMITTING that they wanted to sell smaller bottles because THEY KNEW that the larger ones would be used in exactly the way the Endoscopy Center used the anesthetic, AND that this misuse would lead to the damage that resulted; its all over.
See, that's what they call "the law".
Emotions are fine, but that is all they are.