Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 4, 2025

Minimally Invasive Thumb-sized Pterional Craniotomy for Surgical Clip Ligation of Unruptured Anterior Circulation Aneurysms
Published on: August 11, 2015
Malpractice Litigation Related to Diagnosis and Treatment of Intracranial Aneurysms
1From the Departments of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging (A.K., M.K., S.B., S.P., C.M., J.M., A.M.).
Background And Purpose:
Approaches to management of intracranial aneurysms are inconsistent, in part due to apprehension relating to potential malpractice claims. The purpose of this article was to review the causes of action underlying medical malpractice lawsuits related to the diagnosis and management of intracranial aneurysms and to identify the factors associated and their outcomes.
Materials And Methods:
We consulted 2 large legal databases in the United States to search for cases in which there were jury awards and settlements related to the diagnosis and management of patients with intracranial aneurysms in the United States. Files were screened to include only those cases in which the cause of action involved negligence in the diagnosis and management of a patient with an intracranial aneurysm.
Results:
Between 2000 and 2020, two hundred eighty-seven published case summaries were identified, of which 133 were eligible for inclusion in the analysis. Radiologists constituted 16% of 159 physicians sued in these lawsuits. Failure to diagnose was the most common medical malpractice claim referenced (100/133 cases), with the most common subgroups being "failure to include cerebral aneurysm as a differential and thus perform adequate work-up" (30 cases), and "failure to correctly interpret aneurysm evidence on CT or MR imaging" (16 cases). Only 6 of these 16 cases were adjudicated at trial, with 2 decided in favor of the plaintiff (awarded $4,000,000 and $43,000,000, respectively).
Conclusions:
Incorrect interpretation of imaging is relatively infrequent as a cause of malpractice litigation compared with failure to diagnose aneurysms in the clinical setting by neurosurgeons, emergency physicians, and primary care providers.
Insights
Medical malpractice lawsuits for intracranial aneurysms often stem from failure to diagnose. Misinterpreting imaging is less common, but can lead to significant financial awards for patients.
Area of Science:
- Neurology
- Medical Malpractice Law
- Radiology
Background:
- Inconsistent management of intracranial aneurysms is partly due to concerns over malpractice claims.
- Understanding the legal landscape is crucial for improving patient care.
Purpose of the Study:
- To review medical malpractice lawsuits concerning intracranial aneurysm diagnosis and management.
- To identify associated factors and outcomes in these legal cases.
Main Methods:
- Searched US legal databases for jury awards and settlements related to intracranial aneurysms (2000-2020).
- Included cases involving negligence in diagnosis or management.
- Analyzed 133 eligible cases from 287 identified summaries.
Main Results:
- Failure to diagnose was the primary malpractice claim (100/133 cases).
- Specific failures included not considering aneurysms in differential diagnoses (30 cases) and misinterpreting imaging (16 cases).
- Radiologists were involved in 16% of lawsuits.
Conclusions:
- Failure to diagnose intracranial aneurysms is a more frequent cause of malpractice litigation than imaging misinterpretation.
- Neurosurgeons, emergency physicians, and primary care providers are frequently involved in diagnostic failures.
Related Concept Videos
Aneurysm III: Interprofessional Care
Aneurysm I: Introduction
Aneurysm II: Clinical Manifestations and Diagnostic Studies
Torts I
Intentional...
Aneurysm IV: Nursing Management
Torts III
Quasi-intentional torts in healthcare involve acts where intent is not directed to harm an individual but results in harm due to careless or reckless speech.

