'Live surgery only hope of the patient who was otherwise out of options'

(Editor’s note: This article is based on readers’ comments we received on the article ‘ Death in real time: Aiims patient’s death after live telecast of surgery revives debate ’. The comments have been edited for grammar) Shashidhar: I am a surgeon myself. It is not a question of rich or poor. It was a high risk surgery being done in end stage cirrhotic disease - a condition which itself is a death sentence. This surgery was the only hope of the patient who was otherwise out of options. People should understand that this was a high risk surgery being undertaken by a competent and reputed surgeon who happened to be unsuccessful in this case. All proper permission and consent had been taken beforehand and it was not an experimental surgery, though it was a rare one because of the complexity involved. If the courts go after the surgeons, no surgeons would ever attempt risky procedures ever again. It will be the patients who will loose as the necessary skills required for such surgeries decline." [caption id=“attachment_2386170” align=“alignleft” width=“380”] Representational image. IBNLive[/caption] amar: How do you know the consent was obtained for live demonstration? There are other ways to train surgeons apart from live demonstration to a large audience. The surgical team could get nervous and make mistakes that they may not have done if there weren’t on live TV demonstration. They could have telecast later, once the procedure was over. I totally agree with what Dr Cameron says in the article." Shashidhar: I know it because I have attended such workshops and also organised them. The MCI permission is required for a foreign surgeon before he can operate on patients in India. Legally, there was no flaw in this. However, it is unfortunate that the patient could not be helped by this surgery