Is it true that a surgeon called Robert Liston somehow achieved a 300 per cent mortality rate?
In the early years of Queen Victoria’s reign, a surgeon called Robert Liston, working at a London hospital, developed a considerable reputation. During one infamous incident he was reportedly amputating a patient’s leg when his flaying knife accidentally removed his assistant’s fingers. The patient died from an infection, as did the sorry assistant, and someone watching the operation died from shock after Liston’s knife slashed the poor man’s coat-tails. It remains the only operation in surgical history with a 300 per cent mortality rate. The problem with this story is that it probably isn’t true. The only evidence that the episode ever happened comes from a book called Great Medical Disasters, written in 1983 by Richard Gordon (1921–2017). However, no primary sources confirm that Liston’s operation ever took place. Gordon was more a fan of fiction than fact. Despite its dubious provenance, this story appears everywhere: in medical journals, in history books, and in every biography of Liston ever written. As an anecdote, it contributes to the general idea that surgery in the 19th century was cruel, dramatic and bloody, and that surgeons were emotionally detached – even barbaric. The real story is a lot more complicated than most people assume. Surgeons in the 19th century were often deeply moved by their patients’ pain, and there’s little evidence to suggest that Liston was more concerned with speed than suffering. Stories such as this one may be gory and sensationalist, helping to sell a lot of books, but they don’t accurately represent the surgeons of Liston’s generation. Richard Gordon has a lot to answer for! Agnes Arnold-Forster, historian of medicine and research fellow at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine