A woman who underwent an unnecessary partial mastectomy at a Cork hospital after a pathology report wrongly indicated the highest level of malignancy in a lump in her left breast is to receive an undisclosed substantial sum in damages.
The High Court was told yesterday the lump was benign and all Elizabeth O'Mullane required was an operation to have the lump removed.
The issue of who is liable for the damages to be paid to Ms O'Mullane (52), a mother of three, Boreenmann Road, Cork, has yet to be decided.
Ms O'Mullane has sued the South Infirmary Victoria Hospital Ltd, where the operation took place, a consultant surgeon, Mr Denis Richardson, and a pathologist, Dr Gary Lee, who practises at the Mercy Hospital in Cork.
Ms Justice Elizabeth Dunne was told at the opening of the case yesterday that damages had been agreed and the case was before the courts on liability only.
Paul Sreenan SC, for Ms O'Mullane, said Mr Richardson had told Ms O'Mullane frankly what happened. She was anxious to meet Dr Lee who had called to her home, admitted he made a mistake and apologised for it.
In her evidence, Ms O'Mullane said she started crying when she was told she had breast cancer and that she would need radiotherapy and chemotherapy after an operation.
"The doctor said there was no easy way to tell me. I had breast cancer. I started to cry. I cried all night. My husband told my daughters it was bad news," she said.
Four days after her operation, Mr Richardson told her he had "a very embarrassed pathologist" on the phone, she said. Mr Richardson had said the pathologist had totally misinterpreted the results.
"I did not have cancer. I never had cancer in the first place. I was shell-shocked."
Dr Lee later called around to her home and tried to explain the matter, she said.
Opening the case, Mr Sreenan said Ms O'Mullane was referred to the specialist breast clinic at the hospital in July 2001 by her GP with a small lump in her left breast. She had had a lump in 1996 which had disappeared.
Mr Richardson gave no indication there was anything to worry about and he took a needle sample of cells which was sent to the pathologist, Dr Lee. The radiology came back as "somewhat indeterminate" and he suggested a biopsy.
Dr Lee had advised that the needle sample was "category C5 diagnostic" of malignancy which, Mr Sreenan said, was the highest category in terms of malignancy.
In August 2001, Ms O'Mullane returned to the hospital where another surgeon advised her of the results and said she would require a partial mastectomy.
The conclusion of the second pathology report was that there was no evidence of malignancy and that tissue samples were benign. Dr Lee had looked at his earlier report and reported back that it was wrong, Mr Sreenan said. In fact, the lump in Ms O'Mullane's breast was benign and she should just have had an operation to have the lump removed.
A mammogram had suggested a negative result and the radiologist suggested a biopsy. The surgeon did not record a view that the lump was in any way malignant and the pathologist gave the lump a code five designation, the highest code for malignancy.
In her proceedings, Ms O'Mullane claims she was subjected to unnecessary surgery and is at risk of developing lymphoedema in the left arm. The quality of the triple assessment diagnostic process was below the standard she reasonably expected to receive.