Connect with us


Missing intestines:  Medical group defends colleague



Missing intestines:  Medical group defends colleague
Spread The News

The Association of Nigerian Private Medical Practitioners (ANPMP), Lagos State chapter has described as outright falsehoods media reports that the intestines of late 12-year-old Adebola Akin-Bright went missing after he was operated on by one of their members in Lagos.

Adebola Akin-Bright, taking treatment at the Lagos State University Hospital (LASUTH), Ikeja, died on Tuesday night after spending over one month in the hospital.

His intestines were said to have gone missing in the process of surgery.

Speaker of the House, Rt. Hon. Mudashiru Obasa, called for immediate arrest of the doctor of the private hospital, Obitoks Medical Centre in the Alimosho area of the state, who performed the initial surgery that led to the missing small intestine while investigations continue.

READ ALSO: Man eater pays teenagers to scout for young boys he cannibalizes, shares with others in Gusau

However, ANPMP in a statement jointly signed by Dr. Makinde Akinlemibola and Dr. Debo Adebiyi, Chairman and Secretary respectively, expressed their deep sympathy for the family of the deceased teenager, but pointed out that the story was not as it seems.

“We have been able to establish some privileged and incontrovertible facts based on available scientific evidence at our disposal some of which we will share here:

1:- The patient was first operated on at Obitoks Hospital 6th of March 2023 on account of ruptured appendix after he was referred from a medical centre where he was managed for typhoid enteritis.

2.) It was discovered on the operation table that there was abscess which will require a different management approach to drain. (The appendix at that time must not be removed because of the abscess). The patient however got better afterwards.

3.) The patient presented again about 3 months later and a diagnosis of an obstructed intestine was made which necessitated operating on the abdomen again to relieve the obstruction.

4.) It is of a fact that the parents were invited into the operating room to see and confirm the point of obstruction and the 4 inches of the small intestine to be removed, out of the about 24 feet of the normal small intestine.

READ ALSO: 17-year-old boy commits suicide in Bauchi

5.) It was also established that the patient was referred to the tertiary centre 8 days post-operation at the request of the parents.

6.) It is a fact that the patient was admitted in LASUTH on the 17th of June.

7) The patient was however eventually operated upon on the 14th of July 2023 (i.e. 28 days after admission in LASUTH).  It is therefore strange how the story of the missing/disappearing intestine gained prominence in the media in a patient who was on admission in a public facility (LASUTH) for almost 28 days.

“The question to then ask is, how did the patient survive for 28 days without an intestine? In addition to this, It was also established as confirmed by ultrasound scan and X-ray done at LASUTH on the 19th of June (I.e. 3rd day on admission) that there was the presence of normal intestinal movement.

“The Panel constituted by the State HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY in an attempt to investigate this matter was done without including a doctor on the panel. This makes the job of this respected panel difficult.

“There was clear evidence that members of the panel were genuinely ignorant of some of the workings of the medical profession which became obvious from some of the questions posed during their sitting.

“It is important to note that the honourable members of the panel also demonstrated a clear case of witch-hunt and working to a predetermined answer by attempting to reduce the session to a “Yes” and “No” session for our member from the private hospital while the doctor from the government hospital involved in the management of the deceased was given the latitude to give a detailed report.

“The bias was taken to a ridiculous level when the same doctor who operated on the patient at the government hospital was asked to assess and determine the response of the doctor who operated on the patient in the private hospital. A case of being a judge in your case you would say!

 Of course, the doctor, seeing the absurdity of the request, cleverly declined.

“The call for the arrest of the private doctor we believe might have been borne out of immediate emotional reaction to the news of the unfortunate death of the deceased. There is no rationale whatsoever to call for the arrest of the doctor for simply doing his job, especially when the government hospital involved and his personnel are left untouched.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.