(Update) UK Lasik surgeon, Dr Anupam Chatterjee, to face General Medical Council
Only Me
Ops wrecked our eyesight Feb 4 2003
By Rachel Newton Daily Post Staff
A LEADING eye surgeon faces being struck off, following complaints that
two patients suffered major complications after under-going laser
treatment.
The patients claim that they were left with severe vision problems after
operations by Dr Anupam Chatterjee to correct short-sightedness at the
Ultralase Clinic, in Chester.
Solicitor Paul Burton said that the £1,750 operation actually caused his
already limited vision to deteriorate dramatically, and that he now saw
"ghost" images around objects.
Robert Gregory, who had the procedure four months later, says he has
been left with constantly aching eyes and blurred vision.
Dr Chatterjee appeared before the General Medical Council yesterday,
accused of serious professional mis-conduct.
Ultralase claim that Dr Chatterjee is the second most experienced LASIK
surgeon in the country, and say he has performed more than 2,000
operations at the Chester clinic.
He is the first LASIK sur-geon to appear before the GMC and the case
could have wide ramifications for the LASIK industry if he is found
guilty.
LASIK accounts for 98pc of the total laser eye market in the UK, which
is worth as much as £150m.
The hearing in Manchester was told that Dr Chatterjee contravened
professional guidelines by performing the procedure on Mr Burton and Mr
Gregory on both their eyes on the same day.
The Royal College of Ophthalmologists recommends a period of several
weeks should be left between the treatment of each eye in case of
side-effects.
Dr Chatterjee, of Altrincham, Cheshire, is also accused of failing to
adequately explain the risks of the procedure in both cases.
Mr Burton, a 39-year-old solicitor from Frodsham, Cheshire, told the
hearing he feared his eyesight had been ruined for ever following the
surgery in March, 2000.
He claims he perma-nently sees "starbursts" - streams of light firing in
from all directions - and "haloes", ghost images around the edge of
objects.
The possibility of both side-effects are listed in the consent form Mr
Burton signed before surgery, but he claims they were not explained to
him by Dr Chatterjee.
He said: "When I met Dr Chatterjee immediately before the operation, we
had no discussions about side-effects.
"At the time he seemed hurried, he was sweating and going out of the
room to see other people; his attention was elsewhere.
"I was concerned and was having some reservations about going through
with the operation."
Mr Burton first noticed something was wrong when he came out of the
treatment room immediately after the surgery.
"When I looked at the street light outside I was aware of rays of light
coming from all directions. It was quite alarming," he said.
Mr Burton's vision prob-lems became worse, but he was told by Dr
Chatterjee it was due to his unusually large pupils, which meant they
dilated beyond the treated zone.
The hearing continues.
Only Me
Burton and Robert Gregory, whom he treated in 2000.
David Morris, the defence counsel for the opthalmic surgeon said Mr
Chatterjee admitted a number of the charges but contested others. He
asked for an adjournment of the hearing, explaining that his instructing
solicitors, Ryans, had been unable to secure expert witnesses this week
to bolster Mr Chatterjee's defence.
But the committee ruled that the hearing should go ahead.
They suggested that the defence team should issue witness summonses to
compel their experts to attend.
As revealed in the Manchester Evening News, Mr Burton, 39, claims that
his operation, aimed at correcting his short sight, should never have
gone ahead because he had larger than average pupils.
Glenn Hagele - Council for Refractive Surgery Quality Assurance
Glenn Hagele
Executive Director
Council for Refractive Surgery Quality Assurance
http://www.usaeyes.org
glenn....@usaeyes.org
I am not a doctor.
Only Me
glenn....@usaeyes.org wrote in message
> Thanks for keeping us up to date.
No news as yet on the final outcome but here's the latest. I expect the
decision of the General Medical Council to be announced shortly. Will
keep you informed.
-------------------------------------
Surgeon accused of botching laser eye ops Feb 7 2003
By David Holmes, Chester Chronicle
ONE of Europe's most experienced eye surgeons is waiting to hear his
fate after two patients complained about their treatment.
Paul Burton, 39, of Frodsham, and Robert Gregory, of Nantwich, claim
they suffered vision problems after laser treatment by Dr Anupam
Chatterjee at Chester-based Ultra-lase.
Dr Chatterjee, accused of serious professional misconduct, could be
punished with a warning or struck off if found guilty.
And the landmark case could cost the industry millions of pounds if it
has to change its procedures as a result.
'I am not as happy as I used to be. I'm constantly depressed because of
the visual impairment I have,' said Mr Burton, of Bellemonte Road, who
addressed the General Medical Council (GMC) professional conduct hearing
in Manchester.
'If I go into a shop, as there is poor natural light, I suffer from
star-bursts, haloes and poor vision. If I go to a pub for a drink I have
poor vision. Similarly, it's very difficulty to see a cinema screen and
diff icult to watch TV and enjoy that.
'I look forward to the summer months and longer days. Winter months are
very miserable.'
Mr Burton, who had worn glasses from the age of eight for severe
shortsightedness, was attracted to Ultra-lase because it boasted success
stories including Virgin tycoon Richard Branson and offered a larger
treatment zone with less potential for problems.
At a consultation with optician Wendy Diddums, Mr Burton, a lawyer with
Chester and District Housing Trust, claimed it was he who raised the
issue of side-effects - which she said was only a problem for people
with large pupils.
'The next question was, do I have large pupils - she said 'yes' and had
a brief look into my eye and said 'yes you do',' said Mr Burton, who
claims she told him any side-effects 'would only be slight' and 'would
not affect the overall standard of vision'.
Asked by the GMC lawyer whether there was any discussion about treating
both eyes at the same time, Mr Burton replied: 'She said it was normally
the case that both eyes were treated on the same occasion.'
The patient decided to take advantage of a 'two for one' offer, paying
£1,750 to have both eyes treated instead of £1,750 each.
On the day of surgery, March 7, 2000, Mr Burton entered a 'crowded'
waiting room and signed a consent form handed to him by the
receptionist. He then met the surgeon for the first time.
Asked whether there was any discussion with Dr Chatterjee, who is
accused of failing to adequately explain the risks of treatment, he
replied: 'None whatsoever.'
'To be honest, I thought I had had all my questions answered,' said Mr
Burton. 'He seemed to be sweating quite a lot. He went out for a few
seconds. I heard him being shouted at by people. He was needed by
someone else.'
Mr Burton, who was given anaesthetic eye drops, sat in the waiting room
for 'an hour at least' and became more anxious as the effects of the
drops wore off. More drops were applied and lying on the bench in the
treatment room he felt a clamp being applied to hold back the lids. Dr
Chatterjee squirted in more drops, but Mr Burton claimed he did not
leave suff icient time for them to take effect.
'I could feel the keratome blade cutting into the eye. It was an
unpleasant sensation,' he said. The surgery took about five minutes for
each eye but Mr Burton knew immediately afterwards something was wrong.
'In the waiting room it was just going dark and there were some street
lights,' he said. 'I looked out of the window and could see rays of
light coming from all directions. It was quite an alarming thing to
see.'
Dr Chatterjee admits carrying out the treatment on Mr Burton contrary to
guidelines which recommend treating one eye at a time to assess the
effects before proceeding with the second eye.
He also admits not explaining the extra risk to patients with large
pupils but says Mr Burton was examined correctly and warned of the
risks.
IT specialist Mr Gregory, 54, who paid £1,750 for an operation on both
eyes, claimed to have suffered constant pain and blurred vision after
undergoing an operation by Dr Chat-terjee.
Tom Kark, counsel for the GMC, which brought the prosecution, told the
hearing: 'He didn't see the consultant surgeon until the day of the
surgery and very shortly before it took place. There was not suff icient
time for the patient to discuss prop-erly with the surgeon the risks.'
Dr Chatterjee admits operating on both eyes but again claims the patient
was examined properly and informed of side-effects.
The hearing continues.
Firm stands by their (ex) man
ULTRALASE has supported its former surgeon Dr Anupam Chatterjee.
Dr Chatterjee, a self-employed practitioner, no longer works for the
company but is now with another provider in Scotland.
Ultralase says his leaving has nothing to do with the professional
conduct hearing but that it has simply increased the number of directly
employed surgeons, leaving less work for freelancers.
Communications manager Robin Jones said: 'With regards to Dr Chatterjee
in particular, he has personally performed more than 16,000 laser eye
treatments including over 13,000 LASIKs and is one of the most
experienced LASIK surgeons in Europe.
'His five-year track record at Ultralase is outstanding, with a personal
retreatment rate of well below 1%.'
Mr Jones added: 'Although LASIK is a safe and highly effective
procedure, as with any surgical procedure there is a degree of risk
associated with it.
'However, serious complications are extremely rare, the vast majority of
our patients being absolutely delighted with their treatment.
'Retreatment, or enhancement, is sometimes considered necessary in order
to reduce a patient's prescription to zero - this occurs in about 1% of
patients.'