Artificial intelligence (AI) in medicine is an increasingly studied and widespread phenomenon, applied in multiple clinical settings. Alongside its many potential advantages, such as easing clinicians\' workload and improving diagnostic accuracy, the use of AI raises ethical and legal concerns, to which there is still no unanimous response. A systematic literature review on medical professional liability related to the use of AI-based diagnostic algorithms was conducted using the public electronic database PubMed selecting studies published from 2020 to 2023. The systematic review was performed according to 2020 PRISMA guidelines. The literature review highlights how the issue of liability in case of AI-related error and patient\'s damage has received growing attention in recent years. The application of AI and diagnostic algorithm moreover raises questions about the risks of using unrepresentative populations during the development and about the completeness of information given to the patient. Concerns about the impact on the fiduciary relationship between physician and patient and on the subject of empathy have also been raised. The use of AI in medical field and the application of diagnostic algorithms introduced a revolution in the doctor-patient relationship resulting in multiple possible medico-legal consequences. The regulatory framework on medical liability when AI is applied is therefore inadequate and requires urgent intervention, as there is no single and specific regulation governing the liability of various parties involved in the AI supply chain, nor on end-users. Greater attention should be paid to inherent risk in AI and the consequent need for regulations regarding product safety as well as the maintenance of minimum safety standards through appropriate updates.

Fetal inflammatory response syndrome (FIRS) represents the fetal inflammatory reaction to intrauterine infection or injury, potentially leading to multiorgan impairment, neonatal mortality, and morbidity. Infections induce FIRS after chorioamnionitis (CA), defined as acute maternal inflammatory response to amniotic fluid infection, acute funisitis and chorionic vasculitis. FIRS involves many molecules, i.e., cytokines and/or chemokines, able to directly or indirectly damage fetal organs. Therefore, due to FIRS being a condition with a complex etiopathogenesis and multiple organ dysfunction, especially brain injury, medical liability is frequently claimed. In medical malpractice, reconstruction of the pathological pathways is paramount. However, in cases of FIRS, ideal medical conduct is hard to delineate, due to uncertainty in diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis of this highly complex condition. This narrative review revises the current knowledge of FIRS caused by infections, maternal and neonatal diagnosis and treatments, the main consequences of the disease and their prognoses, and discusses the medico-legal implications.

Anatomical issues are intrinsically included in medico-legal methodology, however, higher awareness would be needed about the relevance of anatomy in addressing medico-legal questions in clinical/surgical contexts. Forensic Clinical Anatomy has been defined as \"the practical application of Clinical Anatomy to the ascertainment and evaluation of medico-legal problems\". The so-called individual anatomy (normal anatomy, anatomical variations, or anatomical modifications due to development, aging, para-physiological conditions, diseases, or surgery) may acquire specific relevance in medico-legal ascertainment and evaluation of cases of supposed medical malpractice. Here, we reviewed the literature on the relationships between anatomy, clinics/surgery, and legal medicine. Some methodological considerations were also proposed concerning the following issues: (1) relevant aspects of individual anatomy may arise from the application of methods of ascertainment, and they may be furtherly ascertained through specific anatomical methodology; (2) data about individual anatomy may help in the objective application of the criteria of evaluation (physio-pathological pathway, identification-evaluation of errors, causal value, damage estimation) and in final judgment about medical responsibility/liability. Awareness of the relevance of individual anatomy (risk of iatrogenic lesions, need for preoperative diagnostic procedures) should be one of the principles guiding the clinician; medico-legal analyses can also take advantage of its contribution in terms of ascertainment/evaluation.

BACKGROUND: The identification of professional liability profiles related to the development of pressure injuries is a very thorny issue from a medico-legal perspective. This is because no matter how strict the applied prevention protocols applied may be, the development of such injuries is largely dependent on endogenous factors. This paper aims to investigate the medico-legal issues related to this topic through the exposition of one case of medico-legal litigation and a traditional review of the literature.
METHODS: We performed a literature search using three databases (Pubmed, Scopus, and Web Of Science), restricting the search to the period between 2001 and 2021. We used \"pressure ulcers\" and \"jurisprudence\" as the main keywords. From an initial library of 236 articles, our selection resulted in 12 articles, which were included in the review.
RESULTS: We identified the ever-increasing expectations of patients and the concept of automatic attribution of responsibility when a pressure ulcer develops as the primary reasons for the increase in litigation over the past 20 years. The related corrective measures are numerous: a strict adherence to guidelines, an adequate documentation of preventive measures, a risk assessment, family involvement, and a successful collaboration between physicians and government institutions.
CONCLUSIONS: The biological complexity of the pathogenetic development of pressure ulcers makes the subject very delicate from the medico-legal point of view. In principle, it is possible to state that a very large proportion of such injuries are preventable, but that there remains a percentage of them that cannot be prevented. In such cases, only a proper documentary demonstration of the adequacy of preventive measures can exclude liability profiles.

Error in medicine and medical liability has a long history dating back to Antiquity. During the 19th Century, most lawsuits related to errors in treating surgical problems were settled. However, in the first half of the 20th Century, lawsuits claimed that mistakes were related to the doctor\'s action: the doctor made something wrong (errors of commission). In Brazil, medical error is defined as inappropriate conduct, including negligence and recklessness, that causes harm to the patient. The physician\'s fear of being suited is the reason for some practice named defensive Medicine (D.M.), defined as ordering unnecessary tests and procedures or avoiding treatments for patients considered at high-risk. Thus, this narrative review aims to analyze and describe the relationship between medical errors, medical negligence, and the practice of D.M. So, the authors propose procedures and attitudes to avoid medical errors and the approach of D.M.: a national focus to create leadership and research tools to enhance the knowledge base about patient safety; a reporting system that would help to identify and learn from errors; the use of a computer-based protocol reminder; some technological devices to help the medical practice (electronic prescribing and information technology systems); creating risk management programs in hospitals. Therefore, the authors conclude that the most critical attitude to avoid medical liability is a good and ethical medical practice with the proper use of technology, based on knowledge of scientific evidence and ethical principles of medicine - for the benefit of patients.

Necrotizing fasciitis (NF) is an infection characterized by necrosis of the superficial muscle fascia and surrounding soft tissues. It usually occurs following skin breaches from penetrating traumas or high-degree burns. Less frequently, it could be related to major abdominal surgery. However, no cases of thigh NF after minor abdominal procedures have ever been reported. A previously healthy 59-year-old male patient underwent a colonoscopic polypectomy. After the procedure, the patient developed an increasing right groin pain. The CT scan showed a gas collection in the right retroperitoneum space and in the right thigh soft tissues. Thus, a right colon perforation was hypothesized, and the patient was moved to the nearest surgery department and underwent a right hemicolectomy procedure. During surgery, the right thigh was also incised and drained, with gas and pus leakage. Nevertheless, the right lower limb continued to swell, and signs of systemic infection appeared. Afterward, clinical conditions continued to worsen despite the drainage of the thigh and antibiotic therapy, and the patient died of septic shock after just two days. This case shows that, although rare, lower limb NF should be considered among the causes of early post-operative local painful symptoms.

Complaints about medical malpractice have increased over time in Italy, as well as other countries around the world. This scenario, perceived by some as a \"malpractice crisis\", is a subject of debate in health law and medical law. The costs arising from medical liability lawsuits weigh not only on individual professionals but also on the budgets of healthcare facilities, many of which in Italy are supported by public funds. A full understanding of the phenomenon of medical malpractice appears necessary in order to manage this spreading issue and possibly to reduce the health liability costs.
The retrospective review concerned all the judgments drawn up by the Judges of the Civil Court of Rome, XIII Chamber (competent and specialized section for professional liability trials) published between January 2018 and February 2019.
The analysis of data concerning the involved parties showed that in 84.6% of the judgments taken into account, one or more health facilities were sued, while in 58.2% of cases, one or more health workers were present among the defendants. When healthcare providers are the only ones to be summoned, it is dentists and aesthetic doctors/plastic surgeons who undergo most of the claims. In the overall period analyzed, the amount paid was 23,489,254.08 EUR with an average of 163,119.82 EUR.
The evidence provided by the reported data is a useful tool to understand medical malpractice in Italy, especially with regard to the occurrence of the phenomenon at a legal level, an aspect still hardly mentioned by existing literature.

The patient\'s security and safety represent a topic of great importance for public health that led several healthcare organizations in many Countries to share documents to promote risk management and preventing adverse events. Surgical Fire (SF) is an infrequent adverse event generally occurring in the operating room (OR) and consisting of a fire that occurs in, on, or around a patient undergoing a medical or surgical procedure. Here a medico-legal case involving a 65-year-old woman reporting burns to the neck due to an SF during a thyroidectomy was described. A literature review was performed using Pubmed and Scopus databases, focusing on epidemiology, causes, prevention activities associated with the SF, and the related best practices recommendations. The medico-legal analysis of the case led to admit the professional liability because the suggested time (3 min) to use the electrocautery after CHG application was not respected. The case analysis and the literature review suggest the importance of implementing National and Local procedures to promote the management of SF risk. Finally, it is necessary to highlight the role of incident reporting and root causes analysis in understanding the cause of the adverse events and thus enforce their prevention.

The clinical specialty of obstetrics is under particular scrutiny with increasing litigation costs and unnecessary tests and procedures done in attempts to prevent litigation. We aimed to identify reports evaluating or comparing the effectiveness of medical liability reforms and quality improvement strategies in improving litigation-related outcomes in obstetrics.
We conducted a rapid scoping review with a 6-week timeline. MEDLINE, EMBASE, LexisNexis Academic, the Legal Scholarship Network, Justis, LegalTrac, QuickLaw, and HeinOnline were searched for publications in English from 2004 until June 2015. The selection criteria for screening were established a priori and pilot-tested. We included reports comparing or evaluating the impact of obstetrics-related medical liability reforms and quality improvement strategies on cost containment and litigation settlement across all countries. All levels of screening were done by two reviewers independently, and discrepancies were resolved by a third reviewer. In addition, two reviewers independently extracted relevant data using a pre-tested form, and discrepancies were resolved by a third reviewer. The results were summarized descriptively.
The search resulted in 2729 citations, of which 14 reports met our eligibility criteria. Several initiatives for improving the medical malpractice litigation system were found, including no-fault approaches, patient safety policy initiatives, communication and resolution, caps on compensation and attorney fees, alternative payment system and liabilities, and limitations on litigation.
Only a few litigation policies in obstetrics were evaluated or compared. Included documents showed that initiatives to reduce medical malpractice litigation could be associated with a decrease in adverse and malpractice events. However, due to heterogeneous settings (e.g., economic structure, healthcare system) and variation in the outcomes reported, the advantages and disadvantages of initiatives may vary.

On March 7, the Supreme Court of New York, Appellate Division, Third Department, ruled that the husband and estate of a woman who died following an abortion performed by a physician whose license was under review cannot sue state officials for damages for her wrongful death. Writing for a unanimous five-judge panel in Negron vs. State of New York, Judge Edward Spain held that the state public health law explicitly grants immunity to members of the Board for Professional Medical Conduct\'s Hearing Committee and the Commissioner of Health for discretionary actions taken within the scope of their duties. Although the Hearing Committee revoked the medical license of the physician--Dr. David Benjamin--for \"gross incompetence and negligence\" in June 1993, he was permitted to continue practicing while he unsuccessfully appealed that determination. In July 1993, while his appeal was pending, Dr. Benjamin performed an abortion on Guadalupe Negron, who died after he tore her uterus during the procedure. The plaintiffs asserted that the Commissioner was required to summarily suspend the physician\'s license after the Hearing Committee\'s ruling and that his failure to do so was an abdication of his statutory responsibility. The court found instead that the state officials had the discretion to decide whether to immediately suspend the physician\'s license. In August 1995, a jury convicted Dr. Benjamin of second-degree murder; he was sentenced to 25 years to life in prison the next month. CRLP filed an amicus brief in Negron vs. State of New York on behalf of the plaintiffs.