The Ziua Daily Newpaper Came Out With New Findings: The Surgery On Patriarch Teoctist Was Not Laparoscopic As Declared Before

Although in the press conference and other interviews regarding the death of the Patriarch the Medical Doctors said that the intervention was laparoscopic, urethral and with laser, and there have been a lot of talks on the embalmment with or without organs, and there were precise statements form Patriarchate that the embalmment of the Patriarch was done intravenous, keeping in all organs in with no surgical incise, now after two weeks two people declared to Journalist Victor Roncea from Ziua that, when doing the ritual washing and anointing they have seen a surgical incise of about 10 – 15 centimeters. It means that the surgery intervention contrary to declarations and the documentation of the hospital was done in a classical way. First, Abbot Nectarie from Radu Voda Monastery declared it and then Varsanufie, the Auxiliary Bishop of the Patriarch, confirmed it to Ziua in a by phone interview.

This new findings might complicate the all inquiries made by the Public Prosecutor, the Ministry of Health and the National College of Medical Doctors.

If you understand Romanian here is the audio link of Ziua, where Jurnalist Victor Roncea posted the recording with live declaration of Bishop Varsanufie.
http://www.ziua.net/display.php?data=2007-08-14&id=225198

If you believe this 1' 20'' interview quaifies for the best and highest mass-media prize in Romania please make your comments.

Yet, No Malpractice or Procedures Violations in Case of Patriarch Teoctist's Surgery

The Bucharest Medicine Doctors College concluded today that there is no evidence of malpractice or mal-procedure regarding the case of Patriarch Teoctist, as the mass-media accused and Prof. Dr. Ursea, the personal Doctor of the Patriarch, stated.

The conclusion of the Bucharest MD College will go either for ratifiaction or rejection to the National Medicine Doctors College.

Yet, many medicine doctors including the personal doctor of the Patriarch keep saying that the surgery was not necessary, it was not an emergency case, it maybe needed hospitalization for one or two weeks, and a careful evaluation of the pacient. They state firmly that from 6:00PM Sunday, hospital enter, until 8:30 AM Monday, surgery begin, there was no time to make and have the results for minimal blood pack analysis. Mass-media is also stressing this point of view.

Personal Medicine Doctor of Patriarch Teoctist Accuses Surgeon Sinescu of Malpractice

The personal doctor of Patriarch Teoctist, M.D. Nicoale Ursea, blames the doctors team who performed the prostate surgery. Ursea said that the general anesthesia was not necessary, especially in this case of laparoscopic intervention. But more than that, he said that the prostate intervention was not necessary. Ursea says that the Patriarch suffered only from a severe urinary infection that first had to be treated and than make investigations on prostate illness. MD Ursea and also other doctors are claiming that the general procedure for surgery under anesthesia of a 92-year old were not at all followed, the 1 to 7 days of pre-surgery preparations was not through. Other MD said forthrightly that from the time of his entry and registration in the hospital, Sunday evening around 6:00 PM, until the surgery begun, Monday morning 10:00 AM, there was not even time to have the all blood analysis results.

A commission has been formed in the College of Medicine Doctors for investigating the actions took by and the performance of Prof. Dr. Ionel Sinescu, the doctor who did the surgery. The State Secretariate of Health will also conduct an administrative investigation on this case.