In a South Asian hospital a cardiologist had done the angiogram and then went for an earlier scheduled meeting, and the patient was waiting in the hospital for PTCA till he returned. During this period he sustained a myocardial infarction. The cardiologist had to settle the matter out of court.

In a South Asian hospital a patient underwent a multivessel PTCA. He later developed restenosis and sued the cardiologist that he was not explained about the option of surgery. The matter is quasi-judicial.

In a Western European hospital a patient had dizziness after pacemaker implant. He had a holter test. The test revealed a long pause. It was decided to be a case of pacemaker malfunction and the box was changed. The old box was sent to company for compensation. there was no evidence of a malfunction. Holter was reanalyzed and it was found that the pause was exactly twice the length of a normal cycle. for that cycle the lead must have had a malfunction. It was fortunately amicably settled.

In a Western European hospital a patient was undergoing change of pervious pacemaker. The Cardiologist did not notice that the lead was not IS1B1 and opened a modern size unit which was wasted due to a different connection.

In a South Asian hospital a patient underwent multi-vessel PTCA. On six month followup angiogram he did not develop restenosis and was discharged from followup. Few months later he sued cardiologist for bleeding (actually it was mild) which had occurred after PTCA. The case is quasi judicial.