Odrex clinic surgeon Vitaliy Rusakov, who is accused of professional negligence in a patient's death case, continues active public communication in a blog format. In his videos, he insists that he does not understand the essence of the charges brought against him. At the same time, the course of the trial in the case of the death of Odesa businessman Adnan Kivan indicates the opposite and attracts attention with an increasing number of contradictions in the statements of Rusakov and his defenders. UNN tried to understand this.
"I don't understand the charges" — despite repeated clarifications
Vitaliy Rusakov again states that he allegedly does not understand the essence of the case and the charges brought against him. However, within a single hearing, the prosecutor explained the charges in detail at least three times, supported by the conclusions of forensic medical examination. Despite this, the accused continues to appeal to the "unclarity" of the wording. But the defense seems to understand the essence and content of the charges, although, logically, it does not agree with them, trying to present arguments in defense of the surgeon.
It should be recalled that Vitaliy Rusakov and his former colleague at the Odrex clinic, oncologist Maryna Bielotserkovska, are accused under Part 1 of Article 140 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine – improper performance of professional duties by a medical worker, which could have led to the death of patient businessman Adnan Kivan. According to the prosecution, after surgical intervention, the patient was not prescribed proper antibacterial therapy, and there was no timely response to postoperative complications. This could have led to the development of sepsis, which, according to the conclusions of the forensic medical examination, could have been the cause of death.
During the court session, information was disclosed that the patient underwent TAP block – an intervention that provoked the development of infection. And the defense understands this.
TAP block is not confirmed by any documents contained in the medical history. There are no records. We will prove that the only recorded fact is a paravertebral block performed by an anesthesiologist, not by surgeon Rusakov. And it was performed in the spinal area, which excludes the possibility of damaging the intestine (as a TAP block could – ed.) and causing this translocation of its own bacteria to cause infection. We will prove that there is no data on such a manipulation (TAP block – ed.) in the medical documentation.
However, the defense does not deny that the TAP block was performed, but only indicates that it was not recorded in the medical documentation. Of course, the court will evaluate the quality of the arguments. But the defense's argumentation, combined with the blogs of the accused himself, creates the impression of a contradictory picture, in which Rusakov begins to look like a person who simply tries not to hear the accusations brought against him.
Rusakov "remembered" that he treated the patient?
Rusakov's previous statements that he did not treat Adnan Kivan now also look contradictory against the general background. After all, during the court session, excerpts of which Rusakov himself demonstrates in his blog, the lawyer actually describes him as a doctor who performed medical interventions on the patient.
We will meticulously reconstruct how the patient was diagnosed, treated, and hospitalized at the Odrex clinic, where surgeon Rusakov provided him with assistance.
It is clarified that Rusakov did not directly treat oncology, but worked with its consequences — performed local operations, drainage, wound irrigation, and dressings. But this, in turn, raises the question: shouldn't Rusakov have noticed the development of sepsis, which is mentioned in the conclusions of the forensic medical examination?
At the same time, the defense during the session indicates that the relationship between Rusakov and Adnan Kivan, as doctor and patient, was long-lasting and, in fact, went beyond purely professional interaction. In the comments, the defense focuses on the personal relationship between the doctor and the patient.
The patient was especially grateful to Rusakov – his doctor… Mr. Adnan Kivan was present at his wedding in 2023.
Rusakov himself "remembered" that he often interacted with the patient: visited him, performed medical manipulations.
It seems that Rusakov's change of position was influenced by the start of the case's consideration in court, and perhaps by the defense's understanding – it is not worth denying the obvious, which is easy to check and confirm.
Recall
In the case of Adnan Kivan's death, Odrex surgeon Vitaliy Rusakov and already dismissed oncologist Maryna Bielotserkovska are in the dock. According to the investigation, after the operation at the Odrex clinic, the doctors did not prescribe the patient the necessary antibacterial therapy and did not properly respond to complications. As a result, sepsis developed, which, according to the examination, could have been the cause of Adnan Kivan's death.
In the context of the high-profile case, attention is drawn not only to Rusakov's statements but also to his behavior during court sessions. The doctor regularly calls on colleagues and "concerned" people to come to court – after which "support groups" with hand-drawn posters in his honor appear in the hall. Such activity may be more like an attempt to pressure the court, and in particular, the presiding judge Larysa Pereverzieva, rather than support for the doctor.