In nearly every medical malpractice case involving a surgical error, the defense relies on a single shield: “It was a known complication.” They point to the signed consent form and argue that the injury was an inherent risk of the procedure.
However, as a former clinical assistant professor, I know there is a vital distinction between an unavoidable biological event and Surgical Drift.
What is Surgical Drift?
Surgical Drift occurs when a surgeon loses their three-dimensional orientation during a procedure. This is often the result of failing to maintain a clear operative field, rushing the dissection, or—most critically—failing to identify anatomical landmarks before proceeding.
When a surgeon severes a nerve or perforates an organ because they were operating outside the “safe zone,” that isn’t a “known complication”—it’s a breach of the standard of care.
Making Negligence Visible
At Trial Graphics 360, we reconstruct the surgery based on the patient’s specific anatomical constraints. We show the jury exactly where the surgeon was and where they should have been. When you can visually demonstrate that the surgeon drifted centimeters away from the safe path, the “known risk” defense evaporates.
