Table 6 Case illustration: broadcasting live surgery

A few years back, I participated as an organizer in a workshop on liver surgery. A leading surgeon from abroad was invited to demonstrate a resection of the liver. A huge tumour of the liver, the removal of which would in any case be controversial in terms of benefit to the patient, was given as a ‘challenge’ to the surgeon. The surgeon, who had arrived late at night, was escorted straight into the operation theatre the next morning. He was also a little ‘taken aback’ by the size of the tumour but chose to go ahead with the procedure. The surgeon demonstrated what he claimed was a ‘bloodless’ and ‘quick’ method of removing the tumour by clamping all the blood vessels to the liver and cutting through the liver with a knife. A spellbound audience cheered at the end of the procedure and the surgeon triumphantly came to the stage and waxed eloquent about his method. A few hours later, the patient bled massively and had to be re-operated in the evening by the local team, the surgeon having moved on to other commitments. Unfortunately, the patient succumbed some days later. By that time, the workshop was over and the audience was completely unaware about the complication and sequence of events, which are, in fact, a known potential hazard of the method used by the surgeon.

Nagral [74]