Re: Fw: Another Asatyamev

[Guest guest]

Bharat ki do tasvir,

 1) Ilaj ke liye Rs250/ nahi honese  bachcha mar jata hai. 2) ye bat batane ke

liye Aamirkhan har minute ki fees Rs. 5 Lakh leta hai.! Mera Barat Mahan.

Dr.Dilip J Raichura

9324351494

________________________________

To: MGIMS <mgims >

Sent: Tuesday, 5 June 2012 7:56 PM

Subject: Fw: Another Asatyamev

 

I am forwarding a copy of the letter written by the nephrologist who

attended to Ms Rai whose case was misquoted by A Khan on his sordid show.

I watched with shock and despair the Satyamev Jayate program of May 27,

2012. I am responding since you referred to me although you do not know me.

I am the Nephrologist that you referred to while conversing with Mr. Rai.

Mr. Rai has been making false and fabricated allegations for the past 2

years. While talking to you, in addition to providing you with false

information, he also withheld crucial facts.Over the past 2 years, Mr. Rai

has been harassing the Transplant surgeon and myself (Nephrologist) and the

Hospital by filing multiple and concurrent complaints at various fora

whether or not they have any role on his complaints. With his manipulations,

he has succeeded to a great extent in bringing to a standstill transplant

surgeries at the the Hospital which has caused a great deal of hardship to

several patients. In addition, he has also caused immense damage to the

noble field of cadaver transplantation in Karnataka State.Once you are aware

of the actual facts, I have no doubt that you will express regret for having

given platform to a sophisticated lier with immense theatrical and

manipulative skills.Here are some facts that shed light on the truth.

1. Mr. Rai never informed you that Mrs. Seema Rai underwent cadaver donor

transplantation and was registered for a cadaver transplantation more than

one year prior to surgery. The phone call on the night of admission was made

because a suitable cadaver donor had been identified by ZCCK (Government

body that allocates cadaver organs) and not by the doctors or the Hospital.

Cadaver transplantation has to be done emergently, otherwise the organ(s)

will decay within hours and become useless. That is why the patient was

admitted on Saturday night (1 May 2010). The patient and her family were all

informed about risks and benefits of transplantation for more than 2 years

(since June 2008). In fact, whenever the patient consulted me she was eager

to get kidney transplant so that she could stop the misery of undergoing

dialysis. You can ask any dialysis patient, they will inform that they do

not want dialysis but prefer transplantation.

2. Mr. Rai, Mrs. Rai and Abha Rai all were again counseled for more than 1

hour on the night of admission about kidney and pancreas transplantation.

Subsequently they also discussed with their relative in New York. Then on

the night of 1 May itself Mr. Rai personally informed me and other doctors

to proceed with kidney + pancreas transplantation. The Informed Consent form

was signed on the night of 1 May itself and handed over the ward doctor.

These facts have been documented by the nurse as well as the ward resident

doctor. The State Medical Council as well as the National Law School of

India have investigated the Informed Consent issue and clearly stated that

Informed Consent was indeed taken prior to surgery. In fact, if the Informed

Consent was not given on the night of 1 May, the cadaver organ would have

been allocated to the next patient on the waiting list for cadaver

transplantation who was also admitted to another Hospital on the same night

for possible transplant surgery. (Whenever a cadaver donor is available,

several patients on the waiting list such as Seema Rai are called and

advised to get admitted so that the cadaver organ does not get wasted in

case one or more patients are found to be unfit or do not want surgery.) If

Mrs. Rai and her family had not consented for the surgery on the night of 1

May, then a surgeon from another Hospital would have proceeded to retrieve

the cadaver organ on the night of 1 May. The surgeon from our hospital would

have gone home. The very fact that our surgeon traveled on the midnight

hours of Saturday to the donor Hospital and brought back the cadaver organs

by about 5.30 AM on a Sunday morning suggests that the patient and family

indeed had agreed for the surgery.

3. Mr. Rai also concealed from you the fact that he had telephoned the

Nephrologist several times on the night of 1 May to seek help to arrange for

a special medicine (Simulect) that was to be given to the patient in the

Operating Theater before the transplant procedure. The Nephrologist had

personally called the Pharmaceutical company on Saturday night to help Mr.

Rai to procure the medicine. The Nephrologist had given personal surety to

the Company since Mr. Rai told him that he did not have cash to purchase the

medicine in the middle of the night. In fact, Mr. Rai procured the medicine

at about 7.30 AM on 2 May (Sunday) and handed the same to the Operating

theater staff. If the patient and Mr. Rai had not consented for the surgery,

why would he purchase the medicine and hand it over to the Hospital staff?

3. Mr. Rai never asked the doctors or any other Hospital staff not to

proceed with the surgery at any time. He was plainly lying when he made a

statement to that effect to you. If in fact, the patient and her family had

not consented for the surgery, that would have been Mr. Rai's first and

major complaint when he filed an FIR with the police on 30 May 2010 accusing

the doctors of murder. In his initial complaint to the police as well as to

the State Medical Council, Mr. Rai never complained that he or the patient

had not consented for the surgery. This fabricated allegation is clearly an

afterthought on Mr. Rai's part.

4. The patient did not receive 119 units of blood, i.e., 60 liters of blood.

She received 33 units of blood over 4 days which is about 13 liters of blood

since she had developed a massive bleeding condition called Disseminated

Intravascular Coagulation (DIC). She also received platelets, FFP and other

blood products to correct DIC. The doctors never told Mr. Rai and his family

that 390 cc of blood would be required. No doctor can predict the exact

amount of blood loss in a given patient who undergoes surgery. Besides, the

large requirement of blood in this patient was due to the fact she developed

a medical complication called DIC which can happen after any major surgery

or major trauma. Normally in transplant surgeries, we do not transfuse any

blood at all.

5. The transplant surgeon is highly qualified to conduct pancreatic

transplantation as well as kidney transplantation. He is trained at well

known Hospitals in the United States where he had conducted numerous

multi-organ transplantation surgeries. All relevant documents were reviewed

by the Health Department before the Hospital was granted registration for

multi-organ transplant surgeries in March 2010.

6. Mr. Rai was again lying when he stated that the doctors had switched off

their phone on 6 May after the patient's death. In fact, Mr. Rai spoke to

the doctors several times after the patient's death. This can be easily

verified by looking at Mr. Rai's phone records.

7. The Hospital was registered for multi-organ transplantation. There was a

clerical error in the Certificate which was acknowledged by the Health

Department. The Health Department have clearly stated in their report that

registration for liver includes pancreas as well (since the skill required

for transplantation of both these organs is one and the same).

8. Mr. Rai also withheld from you that the Karnataka Medical Council has

thoroughly investigated the case and found no evidence of any negligence on

the part of the doctors.

9. Mr. Rai also withheld the fact the Hospital bill was not for the surgery

alone. Most of the cost was due the use of blood and blood products and

other medicines which was necessitated by the development of DIC and

infection. If the patient had not developed DIC, the bill for a transplant

surgery would have been about Rs. 3.5 lakhs. In fact, there was no

additional charge for pancreas at all. Whether the patient received cadaver

kidney or cadaver kidney + pancreas, the bill would have been the same.

There was absolutely no financial motive in recommending the combined

surgery. The surgeon recommended combined surgery because diabetic kidney

failure patients do much better with combined cadaver kidney + pancreas

surgery than cadaver kidney transplant alone. This has been well established

in the medical literature. The surgeon made the recommendation with the best

interest of the patient in mind. Even todate Mr. Rai has not produced any

scientific evidence or professional opinion to contradict the recommendation

of the transplant surgeon. All transplant specialists who have reviewed the

case (from AIIMS-New Delhi, PGI-Chandigarh, Chennai, Bangalore, and USA)

have unanimously opined that the patient received the best possible

treatment and that her death, although very unfortunate, was not due to any

negligence on the part of the doctors or the Hospital.

10. Mr. Rai also did not inform you on the Air that he has filed a complaint

with the Consumer Forum seeking compensation of Rs. 84,55,933/-. I am sure

Mr. Rai has used his theatrical skills to convince you and your team about

his false allegations. I am also confident that you will realize the lapse

your research team has done once all the facts become apparent. I am

enclosing a detailed Medical History as well and other documents that shed

light on true facts.After my medical college, I studied and then worked in

the United States for nearly 16 years. I came back with a dream to serve my

countrymen. However, now after going through the mental trauma caused by a

reckless individual who is inadvertently abetted by a corrupt officialdom

and a thoughtless media, I am beginning to wonder if I made a mistake in

returning to India. Perhaps, I should also go back to the United States like

the doctor that you showed in the opening sequence of your program who

returned to the UK because of the corrupt system in India.

I invite you and your team to visit the Hospital, meet other patients who

have undergone/undergoing dialysis, patients who have had transplant

surgery, and meet the Transplant surgeon so that you can clarify all the

facts for yourself.Please do not hesitate to contact me if you need any

clarifications.

-Dr. R. Sreedhara

Nephrologist