Surgeon ‘performed double cancer operation needlessly’
Expert advised mastectomy but no malignancy found, trial told
A SCOTS breast surgeon advised one of his patients to have a double mastectomy or risk “full-blown cancer”, despite tests not showing any sign of malignancy, a court heard.
Glasgow-born Ian Paterson, 59, then wrote to Frances Perks’s insurers with a false diagnosis in order to justify an operation carried out for “no good reason whatsoever”, prosecutors claim.
The surgeon is standing trial after denying 20 counts of wounding with intent against nine women and one man relating to procedures he carried out between 1997 and 2011.
Jurors have previously heard claims he carried out unnecessary operations for “obscure motives” that may have included a desire to “earn extra money”.
Prosecutor Julian Christopher, QC, told Nottingham Crown Court Ms Perks was referred to Mr Paterson in 1994 aged 35 after finding a lump in her breast after her mother and sister had died from cancer.
He said: “Because of the family history, she was kept under close surveillance and on a number of occasions over the next 10 years Mr Paterson removed lumps from one or the other of her breasts, which in each case were found to be benign.”
More than a decade later, Mrs Perks went to see Mr Paterson again after the discovery of another lump, with examination of tissue around the lump not showing any sign of malignancy, the prosecution said.
Mr Christopher told the jury: “[She was told] it was time to be thinking of having a mastectomy and that, if she did not, she would end up with full-blown cancer.
“He said that if it were him, he would have a double mastectomy.
“He wrote to her insurers, stating that she had recently been diagnosed with multi-focal LCIS in her left breast and that she had a very high statistical probability of having disease in the other breast. [This is] quite wrong.”
Mr Paterson, who was formerly employed by Heart of England NHS Trust and also practised at Spire Healthcare, then carried out the mastectomy on her left breast in November 2008, a procedure the prosecution claims was “another unjustified and unnecessary operation”.
Jurors were told: “Mrs Perks describes getting over the operation as awful. She has to spend two weeks where she had to sleep sitting up. It was extremely painful.
“And she had ongoing problems with the area of her stomach from which tissue had been taken for the reconstruction, which were not put right until she had a further operation in 2012.
“She thought that all of this was necessary because otherwise her life was at risk.”
Joanne Lowson was left with a “significant deformity” in the cleavage area after Mr Paterson wrongly reported test results to carry out operations, the prosecution claimed.
Mrs Lowson was first referred to the surgeon in March 2009 after she found a lumpy area on her left breast – with a mammogram and ultrasound showing “nothing suspicious”, Mr Christopher said.
Mr Paterson, of Altrincham, Greater Manchester, denies all counts.
The trial continues.