A man is suing a doctor and the hospital at which he was treated after undergoing an operation on his left knee when he had intended to undergo an operation on his right knee.
A second opinion from another doctor then claimed that his right knee also did not require an operation.
The man had visited the doctor complaining of pain in his knee, saying he wanted to rid himself of the pain as soon as possible as he wished to join the special forces.
According to the case file, the man underwent an MRI scan on the advice of the doctor, with the scan finding that he had suffered a tear of the medial meniscus on his right knee. As a result, the doctor recommended surgery.
The operation took place on March 30 last year, but when the man woke up, he found that the operation had in fact taken place on the wrong knee.
The man immediately complained to staff at the hospital, and the doctor reportedly admitted his mistake and urged him to undergo a second operation, this time on the correct knee.
However, the file states, the man had “now lost trust in the doctor” and as such refused to undergo a second surgery, instead visiting another doctor.
The second doctor then told the man his right knee also did not require surgery.
The man’s lawyers stated that he had been “subjected without his consent … to an operation on his left knee, in violation of his fundamental rights as derived from Article 7 of the Constitution and Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)”.
Article 7 of Cyprus’ constitution states that “every person has the right to life and corporal integrity”, while Article 3 of the ECHR states that “no one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment”.
In response to the lawyers’ claims, the doctor said he had come to the diagnosis of a possible medial meniscal tear, among other possible diagnoses, and thus recommended an MRI scan, which “did not show any serious damage to the knee”.
He said the man had then visited him again a few days later, still complaining of pain in his knee. As such, he recommended an arthroscopy – a surgical procedure which allows doctors to see the knee without making a large incision.
He confirmed that the man had undergone the surgery on the wrong knee on March 30 last year, and said that in his defence, the man’s left knee “did not suffer any damage” as a result of the surgery, and that “on the contrary, a problem which did exist was treated”.
He added that given what had been found, the surgery on the left knee had also been necessary.
The hospital maintained that the doctor is self-employed and uses its facilities as a partner.
