Surgeon Who Accidentally Removed A Womans Ovary Instead Of Her Appendix Is Struck Off




Surgeon Who Accidentally Removed A Womans Ovary Instead Of Her Appendix Is Struck Off After Being Branded A Danger To Patients


Dr Lawal Haruna, 59, botched up three operations over the course of two years - including removing a woman's ovary because he said the appendix and fallopian
tubes were similar 'worm-like structures' in the same area.

Dr Haruna also botched up two further operations - mistaking a lump of fat for an appendix in one case and a skin tag for a harmful lump in another.  

The unnamed woman, known as Patient B, was treated by him when she was admitted for abdominal pain while he was working for Sheffield Teaching Hospitals Trust in Sheffield, South Yorkshire. During the operation, one of her ovaries was removed leaving her appendix - which was causing her great pain. Luckily for the woman, she was not of child-bearing age as it could have affected her fertility. 


A man known as Patient A was supposed to be treated for acute appendicitis - but Dr Haruna removed a pad of fat instead by mistake.


 Haruna also botched a third operation on a woman known as Patient C who had been admitted with a cyst - only for him to remove a skin tag instead.


One expert who investigated the operations said in a report: 'Dr Haruna was mistaken in his identification of the appendix and removed the ovary and tube in error. This is a serious omission and a breach of duty of care.


'To have mistaken a fat pad for the appendix and to have failed to deal adequately with the pathology suggests a standard of care which is seriously below that expected of a reasonably competent Staff Grade in General Surgery'.'


However, Haruna who claims to have 25 years experience later said the incidents as 'trifling errors' and said the appendix and fallopian tubes were similar 'worm-like structures which lie in a similar area.'  A Medical Practitioners Tribunal found him guilty of misconduct and banned him from treating patients.




Chairman Clare Sharp told Haruna his treatment of one patient was 'reckless' and added: 'You were asked to put yourself into your patients' shoes, and to consider how your actions made them feel. 


'Whilst you have apologised to the patients in question, you showed a lack of empathy for them, as well as for the serious consequences of your failings.


'Patient A was in pain for a month after your operation, and had to undergo a further operation to remove his appendix after you failed to do so the first time. Had Patient B been of child-bearing age, your removal of a fallopian tube and ovary could have been incredibly serious and potentially life-changing for her, but you showed no recognition of these potential consequences.


'You said Patient C seemed 'fine' when you met with her post-operatively, but she suffered a painful post-operative infection and she later wrote she had lost confidence and worried about about any further surgery for her and any member of her family. You had no real concept of how your patients felt, and the impact which your actions had on them post-operatively.


'The Tribunal did not believe that your misconduct was deliberate, but it concluded that there was a continuing risk to patients.'


The surgeon, who represented himself, told the Manchester hearing he had 'poor vision' at the time he carried out the surgery and claimed it would be 'harsh' to strike him off.


He added: 'I want to apologise to all the patients. I didn't experience operative difficulties, in removing whatever I removed. Everything had gone along fine and it was not difficult to remove.


'It was only later I realised it was not the appropriate part. The operation itself, the technicality, was fine but the wrong specimen was removed.


'I have performed hundreds of appendicectomies, this was due to lapse of judgement.'


But expert witness, Dr Michael Zeigerman, said: 'If you feel you are not capable for any reason then you should not perform the procedure. If you are over tired or feel you are impaired in any way your duty is to the patient. You must say I can't do this I must ask for help, there's always someone at the end of the phone.


'If your vision is impaired and you are tired you need to ask for help to lower the risk of 'never events'.


'Your responsibility is to your patient and if you feel impaired you should seek help. If you are visually not good you shouldn't be operating. If your ability is impaired you shouldn't start an operation or if you become unwell then you should ask for help. Sometimes your visibility does start to get a bit blurred and you stop and go for a cup of tea but you don't just carry on.


'You need to make sure what you are taking out is the right thing. It makes it stranger that somebody with that experience would mistake the appendix for a pad of fat in one case and the fallopian tube in another case. It should make you more likely not to miss them.


'A never event is something that should never, ever happen. It's so serious that Jeremy Hunt himself has every single one of them written in his office - and we have three of them here.' 


As a result, the senior surgeon has been struck off after being branded a 'danger to patients'.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

NATURAL/HERBAL/HOME REMEDY FOR TREATING SHORTAGE OF BLOOD