Facts
In May of 1999, Quintin Que (Quintin) was advised to undergo an angiogram and aortogram at the Philippine Heart Center by Dr. Avenilo Aventura (Dr. Aventura) after suffering an aneurysm in the aortic arch, which affected his vocal cords. Quintin underwent the procedure as advised. Thereafter, Quintin was discharged and had regular checkups with Dr. Aventura, who continuously updated the Que family on the need for open-method surgery. In October 1999, Dr. Aventura recommended a new non-invasive treatment for an aneurysm that uses a custom-built gadget called a stent as an alternative to open-method surgery. The Que family had reservations about the procedure, but Dr. Aventura assured them that it would be less risky than the traditional open-method surgery. Eventually, the Que family agreed since Dr. Aventura told them that Quintin’s aneurysm was fatal and the stenting procedure was “virtually risk-free.”
On February 14, 2000, Dr. Verhoeven, a Belgian doctor specializing in stenting procedures, was introduced to the Que family. He announced the system product as state-of-the-art, and it would be the first time it would be used in Asia. After the operation, Dr. Verhoeven explained that he could not complete the operation because he could not go through the bend/curve where the stent should have been deployed. After all, the device on hand was “faulty”.
Quintin never woke up and suffered a stroke after the incomplete stenting procedure. From February 15, 2000, until Quintin’s death on February 27, 2000, the Que family constantly communicated with Dr. Aventura, but the latter “turned his back” on them. After the family had the body autopsied, the autopsy showed that the death was due to complications of hypertensive atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, and the manner of death is therefore classified as natural.
Elpidio Que filed a Complaint for Damages against Dr. Aventura, among others.
ISSUE: Whether or not the respondent is liable for medical negligence
Ruling
NO. Medical malpractice is a particular form of negligence that consists in the failure of a physician or surgeon to apply to his practice of medicine that degree of care and skill which is ordinarily employed by the profession generally, under similar conditions, and in like surrounding circumstances. In relation thereto, in a lack of informed consent litigation, the plaintiff must prove:
- the physician had a duty to disclose material risks;
- the physician failed to disclose or inadequately disclosed those risks;
- as a direct and proximate result of the failure to disclose, the patient consented to the treatment they otherwise would not have consented to; and
- the patient was injured by the proposed treatment.
The Supreme Court ruled in the negative.
The facts would show that Dr. Aventura informed the Que family, most especially Quintin, of the material risks inherent in the stenting procedure, and that includes death. He also informed the family that if they decide to continue the operation, another physician will operate on Quintin because he does not specialize in stenting procedures. Moreover, Quintin signed the Consent for Endovascular Stenting and the Consent to Operation, Administration of Anesthesia, and the Rendering of Other Medical Services. Furthermore, expert witnesses Dr. Tuazon and Dr. Figueroa, both experts in the field of cardiovascular and endovascular surgery, testified that stenting would still be the sound medical advice and treatment for Quintin rather than the open-method surgery, considering his underlying condition. Therefore, the preponderance of evidence tilts in favor of respondents.