Court told breast surgeon carried out ‘completely unnecessary’ operations

Nottingham-crown-court
Nottingham Crown Court

A leading breast surgeon accused of causing GBH to ten patients carried out operations which were ‘completely unnecessary’, a court has been told.

Ian Paterson, 59, worked at NHS and private hospitals with a reputation of being “extremely experienced and knowledgeable”.

But it is claimed a number of alleged victims, including some from Nottinghamshire, did not need the procedures he performed on them.

Mr Paterson, of Castle Mill Lane, Ashley, Altrincham, appeared at Nottingham Crown Court on Tuesday (February 28) and pleaded not guilty to 20 charges dated from 1997 to 2011.

The charges relate to wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm, in relation to individual operations which he told patients they needed, often on the basis they had or were at risk of developing breast cancer.

On the first day of the trial, prosecutor Julian Christopher QC alleged all the operations were “completely unnecessary”.

The jury and Judge Justice Jeremy Baker QC heard Mr Paterson was a busy surgeon with an “excellent bedside manner” and “extremely experienced and knowledgeable in his field”.

But Mr Christopher also told the court Mr Paterson carried out procedures “not because he thought it was in the best interests of the patient, but for his own perhaps obscure motives”.

“Whether to maintain his image as a busy successful surgeon in great demand and at the top of his game, whether to earn extra money by doing extra operations and follow up consultations,” he added.

One of the alleged victims is Marian Moran who, in 1998, then aged 49, saw Mr Paterson with a lump in her breast.

Mr Christopher said Mr Paterson appropriately arranged for a mammogram – an X-ray – and an ultrasound scan, carrying out fine needle aspiration: the removal of tissue or fluid with a needle under a microscope. Again, this was the correct thing to do.

The results were “not normal but probably benign” and Mr Paterson carried out an excision of the breast.

The results were “inconclusive” and Mr Paterson carried out a local excision – removing the whole of the lump – with the results showing the problem to be a papilloma: a wart-like growth with no presence of cancer.

However, Mr Paterson is alleged to have carried out an “axillary clearance” – where lymph nodes and surrounding fat in the arm pit were removed – a procedure he had “no reason to perform”.

This, the prosecutor said, caused “long-term swelling on the arm” – count four of the allegations.

In 2001 and 2003, Mrs Moran had further recurrences of papillomas removed.

In each case, there was “no evidence of any malignancy”, but Mr Paterson told Mrs Moran they were “precancerous”.

Mr Christopher said Mr Paterson told Mrs Moran’s GP he thought the deterioration towards cancer in the left breast was “inevitable”, telling her health insurers, AX PPP, she would develop cancer unless the rest of the breast tissue was removed.

The surgeon carried out a mastectomy to remove the breast on February 21, 2004, and undertook breast reconstruction, allegedly a “highly unnecessary” procedure.

Evidence showed no evidence of malignancy and the papillomas were “entirely normal”, even though Mr Paterson maintained the mastectomy was the right decision.

Three years later, Mr Paterson is accused of removing another lump from Mrs Moran’s left breast – without obtaining a pre-operative diagnosis.

He claimed some breast tissue was left behind after the mastectomy – but the prosecutor said this was, instead, fat tissue caused by the surgery.

The prosecutor said Mr Paterson exaggerated this and convinced Mrs Moran to have another “unnecessary” operation.

Mr Paterson was formerly employed by Heart of England NHS Trust and Spire Healthcare.

The trial, expected to last ten weeks, continues.

(Visited 165 times, 1 visits today)