Woman not told if ovaries were removed

A woman who required a major blood transfusion after a hysterectomy was unable to find out from her doctor whether he had removed her ovaries, a inquiry heard yesterday.

Patient C seemingly only found out she did, in fact, still have her ovaries — four years after the operation took place.

Details emerged yesterday as the Medical Council inquiry into consultant obstetrician and gynaecologist Peter Van Geene continued.

He had carried out a vaginal hysterectomy and a pelvic floor repair on Patient C at the Aut Even private hospital in Kilkenny, after she came to him complaining of discomfort and incontinence.

Patient C, a mother of seven in her late 60s, said Mr Van Geene was very reassuring during her initial consultation with him in September 2011. She had her operation around lunchtime on October 11.

After she was brought back to the ward, she recalled: “I was very happy. It was very relaxed. I just wanted to lie there, happy that it was all over.”

Several hours later, however, Patient C developed a post-operative bleed, and underwent another operation in order to locate the source of the bleed. She also required a significant blood transfusion, amounting in total to six units of blood and four units of fresh frozen plasma.

Recovery from the operation took longer than she expected, Patient C told the fitness to practice inquiry. “I was weak, I was surprised how weak I was because I have a strong constitution,” she said.

Just before Christmas, she met with Mr Van Geene for a post-operative review.

“I was pleased because I could walk with comfort, I could sit with comfort,” she said.

She had asked whether he had removed her ovaries. The consultant said he couldn’t tell her because he didn’t have her medical records with him.

Neasa Bird, counsel for the Medical Council, asked whether the issue about her ovaries had been answered, and Patient C said: “No.”

Eugene Gleeson, legal counsel for Mr Van Geene, said to Patient C: “Your ovaries were not removed.” She gave a non-committal response.

Despite the question about her ovaries and her incontinence, which continues to this day, Patient C said Mr Van Geene was very considerate. “I had no complaints at all,” she said.

John Cudmore, a consultant anaesthetist at Aut Even and St Luke’s hospitals in Kilkenny, said there was no communication between himself and Mr Van Geene prior to, or after, Patient C’s second operation on October 11.

Her had been called into hospital at approximately 9.30pm in order to assist with a laparotomy, as Patient C was suffering from a significant post-operative bleed. He assessed the patient and then went into theatre. Mr Van Geene also entered but the two doctors did not discuss the patient, according to Mr Cudmore.

This was unusual, he said, as normally “you would put your heads together” and “come up with a game plan”.

Mr Cudmore said there was also no communication between himself and Mr Van Geene after the operation.

The inquiry, in its fourth day yesterday, is examining allegations of poor professional performance faced by Mr Van Geene, who lives in Co Carlow. The complaints relate relation to four women on whom he performed hysterectomies between 2009 and 2011.