A female GP told a court she was left in agony after Glasgow-born breast surgeon Ian Paterson carried out a "traumatic and unnecessary" mastectomy on her.
Dr Rosemary Platt told a jury she had undergone the procedure to remove her right breast after being advised by Paterson.
She had the operation when she was 51 in June 2001 at Paterson's privately-run Little Aston Hospital, West Mids.
Dr Platt said that despite her 20-year medical background, she had no specialist knowledge of her situation and was "wearing her patient hat" when she saw Paterson.
She described an "unnecessary" excision on her armpits as "excruciating" and her mastectomy as a lengthy and "painful" operation.
Giving evidence at Nottingham Crown Court, Dr Platt said: "He said I should have a mastectomy and immediate reconstruction.
"It was a very difficult decision and I talked it through with my husband.
"He asked Mr Paterson if his wife had these types of results, would he go through with the operation and he said yes.
"I decided to accept this request because I felt he was a trusted professional.
"He was a doctor who cared about his patients.
"We had no reason but to trust everything he said.
"I had the mastectomy of my right breast on June 25, 2001.
"It took the best part of six hours.
"Apparently there was quite heavy blood loss.
"It took me a long time to recover from it.
"Although, I remember Mr Paterson coming to see me in the recovery room and he said it was done well and he said he had done his best to leave me with some cleavage so I presume I had a cleavage sparing operation at that stage.
"He said that it was all clear which I assumed meant all the breast tissue had been removed from that side.
"It was a very painful operation.
"Because of the nature of the lobular carcinoma in situ in the one breast, he said it would lead him to believe that the same process was going on in the other breast, even though I had never had problems in that breast.
"He felt that in the long term I would have to have the same procedure on the left side, meaning mastectomy and immediate reconstruction.
"I was feeling so weak that I said 'let's just leave it' and if I had any more lumps I would be straight back."
Dr Platt told the jury "concerns were raised" about Paterson's treatment of her when she was examined by consultant general surgeon Philip Brookes after a mammogram in 2012.
She said: "I continued having regular reviews until 2009, when I was discharged.
"I went back for a mammogram in 2012 and I saw Mr Brookes.
"Everything was OK, thank goodness.
"He spoke to me about the earlier treatment I had had.
"He raised some concerns at that time."
Earlier in the trial, prosecutor Julian Christopher QC told the jury Paterson created a "heightened sense of anxiety" in Dr Platt, wrongly advising her to have a mastectomy.
He said: The wide local excision would not have been justified even if there had been lobular cancer in situ present.
"In addition, having the drains removed after the axillary clearance was something which Dr Platt remembers as one of the most painful things she went through.
"It is not at all surprising that she was apparently presenting with new concerns about possible lumps leading to excessive clinical visits and ultrasound examinations, and consenting to what in fact was a traumatic series of unnecessary operations."
Paterson, 59, of Altrincham, Greater Manchester, denies 20 counts of unlawfully and maliciously wounding nine female patients and one male between 1997 and 2011.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article