A LEADING plastic surgeon in Lancashire has been struck off after a watchdog ruled he was ‘habitually dishonest’ and repeatedly failed to put patients in the picture over cosmetic procedures.

Dr Peter Paterson, who formerly ran the Sandon House Clinic, near Samlesbury, had even lied during his disciplinary hearing, claiming he needed to be absent for ‘personal reasons’ when he was in fact carrying out surgical procedures at another unit.

MORE TOP STORIES:

Paterson, who previously told the Lancashire Telegraph he had a number of East Lancashire patients on his books, was accused of serious failings in relation to six unnamed clients.

And following a lengthy series of hearings before the Medical Practitioners’ Tribunal Service, a three-strong panel has decided he should be kicked out of the profession, after finding the case against him proved in relation to five out of the six cases.

In one case where he was performing a breast uplift at The Spire, Paterson was said to have failed to take an adequate medical history, discussed the impact or risks associated with the operation or even take her breast size.

Another patient was not warned of the risk of symmastia, where the breasts can merge together, before an augmentation operation. Paterson was later found to have altered her medical records retrospectively to suggest the advice had been given.

His promises to another breast-op patient that she would ‘not feel any pain’ during surgery under a local anaesthetic were also noted.

The panel also considered a fourth case involving a facelift, where Paterson was found to have failed to discuss possible scarring effects or nerve damage beforehand, or offer post-operative care on changing dressings or removing staples.

Paterson was also said to have failed to discuss the implications of surgery with a tummy-tuck patient or properly investigate ‘significant post-operative bleeding’. He was also criticised for failing to manage the patient’s post-operative pain.

Panel chairman Rev Robert Lloyd-Richards said: “It has become obvious that Mr Paterson, during the previous six weeks hearing, lied to his regulator in claiming that he needed to be absent, on occasions for personal reasons, but at that time in reality he was undertaking surgical procedures.”