Imprisoned Surgeon Testifies on Breast Tissue Removal at Inquest

Imprisoned surgeon Ian Paterson informed an ongoing inquest concerning the passing of a patient that he had fully excised all breast tissue during her initial mastectomy. Christine Baker passed away in 2015 at the age of 59, following a recurrence of her cancer after undergoing an operation performed by the medical professional, who is currently incarcerated for wounding offenses related to surgical procedures. Her case represents the third among 62 deaths of Paterson’s patients being investigated by a coroner. The inquiry has, to date, concentrated on procedures known as cleavage-sparing mastectomies and the degree to which any remaining breast tissue might have contributed to the cancer’s re-emergence. Testifying at the hearing in Birmingham, Paterson stated that Mrs. Baker’s tumor had been excised. The investigation had previously been informed that she underwent an initial mastectomy in 2005, followed by a second procedure after receiving another cancer diagnosis in 2007. Paterson worked for the Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust in Birmingham and also operated within the private healthcare sector at Spire Parkway in Solihull and Spire Little Aston, situated near Sutton Coldfield. The inquest was informed that Mrs. Baker, a secondary school teacher from Birmingham who originated from Stoke-on-Trent and resided in Solihull, underwent a “skin-sparing” mastectomy in 2005. This procedure followed advice that there was no increased risk to the reconstructive component of the operation. When questioned about whether he had intended to perform a cleavage-sparing mastectomy on Mrs. Baker, Paterson responded: “It’s nonsense to suggest that anyone having immediate reconstruction would require any residual tissue or former cleavage. That tissue is going to be provided by reconstruction or an implant.” Subsequently, when asked if his intention was to remove all of the breast tissue, Paterson affirmed with “yes”. The inquiry was informed that 209 grams of tissue were excised, an amount deemed “a small amount” by a multi-disciplinary team for an individual with a 34B-cup breast, which typically weighs 350 grams. Paterson stated: “The weight is the weight. Whether it’s too light or too heavy isn’t going to change the fact that the operation is complete.” He further commented: “The weight is the weight and entirely commensurate with the removal of all the tissue.” A pathology report was presented at the hearing, indicating that the tumor extended to the excision margin. Paterson was then asked: “Does it indicate the tumour hadn’t been completely removed?” He responded: “No.” Subsequently, the inquest was presented with Mrs. Baker’s medical records from February 8, 2007, following her complaint of a lump in her right reconstructed breast. She was subsequently diagnosed with “carcinoma recurrence,” which signifies a return of her cancer. Documents presented to the court revealed that during her second mastectomy, 387 grams of tissue were extracted. Paterson was questioned as to whether this might suggest he had “left a significant amount of breast tissue at the original operation.” Nevertheless, the surgeon asserted that 387g was an imprecise measurement. The inquest was informed that two experts held the opinion that Mrs. Baker’s death was not connected to the recurrence of the 2005 cancer. In response, Paterson stated: “I agree with that. She unfortunately had an aggressive disease.” He was subsequently informed that the multi-disciplinary team asserted that an excessive amount of tissue had been retained. The medical professional stated that he not only disagreed with this assertion but also that there was “a lot of evidence that completely disproves it.” Paterson is currently serving a 20-year prison sentence for wounding. The inquest into Mrs. Baker’s death remains ongoing. Testimony has previously been presented in the cases involving Chloe Nikitas and Elaine Turbill.