Witness defends his claim there was no reason for ops

A fitness to practise inquiry into a consultant obstetrician and gynaecologist who performed hysterectomies on four elderly women has heard an expert witness defend his claims there may have been no clinical reason for the operations on two of the women.

Dr Peter Van Geene performed the hysterectomies between 2009 and 2011 at Aut Even hospital in Kilkenny. Most of the women developed serious complications following these procedures, and they required further surgery.

Under cross-examination from Dr Van Geene’s solicitor Eugene Gleeson, witness Dr Peter McKenna defended his claims that there may have been no clinical reason for performing the operations on two of the women at the heart of this case.

Dr McKenna, former master at the Rotunda, said patient Helen Cruise, aged 62, originally sought medical assistance because she was suffering from incontinence. He argued that a hysterectomy would not usually be an appropriate treatment for incontinence.

“The woman came to the clinic for one problem and she got an operation for another,” said Dr McKenna, adding that Dr Van Geene should have told Ms Cruise a hysterectomy would not alleviate her incontinence issues.

Mr Gleeson asked: “Did it ever occur to you, Dr McKenna, that you might be wrong?”

Dr McKenna replied that the thought does occur to him frequently, but “not today, Mr Gleeson”.

Dr Van Geene is disputing the allegations.

The inquiry continues.