In short
A bile-duct injury is a claim that the duct was cut, or that a leak formed, while the gallbladder was removed, and not every leak is counted as fault by itself. The patient asks what was written about the anatomy in the operation note, and on which day the leak was noticed. A sponge left in the body is not a copy of this injury. The question whether the incision was unnecessary at all is separate as well. An amount of compensation and a statistic are not added to this record.
If the note does not write that the duct was seen, a result is not invented from that sentence. A second intervention or an endoscopy writes the place of the injury separately. If the two documents conflict, the order of the hours is asked. The petition does not close this order in a single line.
The note writes the anatomy
The operation note should carry how the gallbladder was removed and whether the duct was seen. A short name of the procedure does not show that the duct remained intact. The note of a second operation or of an endoscopy writes the place of the injury separately. If the two notes conflict, the order of the hours is asked. The medical meaning of this stands under an expert report. This record does not invent a millimetre and does not write a statistic.
The indication for the operation stands under an unnecessary operation. In a necessary operation done for a gallbladder with stones, an injury to the duct does not mean the operation was unnecessary. An amount of compensation is not added to this separation. The document shows which question was asked.
A foreign body and discharge
A swab forgotten in the abdomen stands under a retained item. A bile leak is not the swab appearing on imaging. Jaundice or abdominal pain after discharge may also raise a question of early discharge. That door stands under early discharge. The general list stands under harm after an operation. This record takes up the duct document.
If the amount of drainage stands in the discharge note, that line does not mean there was no leak at all. If the discharge summary and the ward minute conflict, both are kept. The petition does not tell the sponge and the duct in the same sentence. An amount of compensation and a statistic are not written.
The hour it was noticed
An injury noticed and repaired during the operation, and a leak noticed days later, are not the same sentence. Delay looks at whether it was ignored while there was a record of jaundice or of the drain in the discharge note. If there is no record, delay is not assumed. Early notice does not create absence of fault by itself either. Whether the repair was done is read from the note.
If the hour of the second attendance is after the hour of discharge, the document in between is asked for. Time spent at home does not delete the hospital note. A decision is not made until these hours stand side by side. The application does not freeze the moment of noticing as a single day, and an hour that is not written is not invented.
Imaging and repair
The place of the leak is read from the imaging and the operation document, not from an oral account. If there is no film or endoscopy printout, the place is not drawn by guesswork. The repair note does not stand in for the note of the first operation. The two documents stand side by side. If the hour in the patient file differs from the hour on the printout, the conflict is written down.
The repair being done at another centre does not by itself turn the first note into a holding of fault. The referral document shows where the patient went and when. The petition does not take the referral paper for the operation note. An amount of compensation and a statistic are not added to this imaging.
The second centre's note does not by itself change the anatomy sentence of the first operation. The referral document carries the place that was gone to and the hour. The petition does not paste the diagnosis on the referral paper in place of the first note. A decision is not made until the two documents stand side by side. An amount of compensation and a statistic are not written on this referral line either. If the hour is not written, an hour is not invented.
What is separated in the leak record
The question of what happens if the duct is cut in a gallbladder operation is built from the operation note and the hour the leak was noticed. These two records are separated. An amount of compensation and a statistic are not written. A retained item is not put in the petition in place of this injury.
An office in Çankaya does not choose the authority the file will go to.
Conclusion
A bile-duct injury is read from the note and from the hour of the leak. Not every leak is fault. A retained item is a separate door. An amount of compensation and a statistic are not written. The frame stands on the health law page. The basis is Law No. 1219.