NHS Trust Admits Unnecessary Mastectomies in County Durham Breast Cancer Care
Constantvpn.com – Twenty women had mastectomies that could have been avoided while receiving breast cancer treatment through the County Durham and Darlington Foundation Trust, the organisation has confirmed. The admission is part of a wider review into failings at its breast unit, where hundreds of former patients have now been identified as having experienced harm.
The trust is examining breast cancer cases from January 2023 to February 2025, as well as the records of 640 former patients who contacted a dedicated helpline. Of the 514 cases assessed so far, 315 patients were found to have suffered harm. Seventy-seven of those cases involved significant harm, while one patient is known to have died.
Some patients had cancer diagnoses that were missed or delayed. In certain cases, the disease later spread, chief executive Steve Russell said. A decision is expected shortly on whether to widen the investigation to cover cases dating as far back as 2015, a move that could require up to 10,000 records to be reopened.
Women describe lasting physical and emotional consequences
For many affected women, the trust’s review has brought distressing news years after they underwent treatment. Patients have spoken of the shock of learning that full breast removal may not have been necessary, alongside the continuing physical and psychological effects of their care.
Denise Howarth, 51, from Consett in County Durham, was diagnosed in 2023 with grade 1 breast cancer, a type described as slow growing. After finding a lump, she initially had a lumpectomy. She later underwent a mastectomy, eight rounds of chemotherapy and radiotherapy.
In September 2025, she received a phone call followed by a letter from the trust. The letter stated that she could have been offered a second lumpectomy instead of having her breast removed, but that possibility had not been discussed with her.
“I was just in shock, then ended up in tears on the phone,”
Denise said an apology could not undo the result of the treatment.
“All good and well,”
she said, but it would not restore what she had lost.
Another former patient, identified as Jo, underwent a mastectomy in 2021. A former NHS worker, she contacted the trust’s helpline and was told in a phone call earlier this year that the operation could have been avoided.
Jo said she had placed considerable trust in the medical staff caring for her, including people she had regarded as colleagues during her NHS career.
“You go to work to do your best, don’t you? So why would I think that anybody else wouldn’t?”
She said the experience had left her feeling “mutilated” and described the failures as “absolutely unforgivable”.
Trust leader offers an unreserved apology
Steve Russell, who recently became the trust’s chief executive, said the failures were unacceptable and apologised directly to those affected. His remarks came after women and their families came forward to describe the impact of their treatment and to support calls for a public inquiry.
“There are no words I could use to convey how personally distressed I am. What happened was utterly unacceptable.”
A mastectomy involves the removal of all or part of a breast. It can be an essential treatment in some breast cancer cases, but the cases identified in this review concern women for whom less extensive surgery could have been offered. The distinction matters because surgery choices can affect recovery, body image, emotional wellbeing and future quality of life.
Former patients have formed support networks as the scale of the review has become clearer. Their concerns extend beyond the individual treatment decisions to how problems were allowed to arise, whether warning signs were addressed, and whether sufficient safeguards were in place for patients receiving care over a number of years.
Questions over clinical leadership and private arrangements
The consultant responsible for overseeing the care of both Denise and Jo was Mr Amir Bhatti. He was the trust’s clinical lead for breast services between 2013 and 2024. He has been suspended from clinical practice, although he remains employed by the trust on full pay.
Nearly £6m was paid by the trust over six years to breast cancer diagnostic clinics and surgery companies privately run by Bhatti. Concerns about that arrangement were highlighted in a 2025 review of the trust’s management conducted by governance specialist Mary Aubrey.
Aubrey said that outsourcing patient appointments had introduced financial incentives that could potentially pose “a risk to clinical standards”. Russell said payment by service was not unusual in healthcare, while indicating that the trust has since changed its approach.
The circumstances raise wider questions about how treatment pathways are scrutinised when care involves both NHS services and externally arranged appointments. For patients, the central issue is whether they were given clear information about their options, the likely benefits and risks of each procedure, and enough opportunity to take part in decisions affecting their bodies.
Police and National Crime Agency examine allegations
The National Crime Agency is now working alongside Durham Police to assess allegations made by former patients and establish whether any criminal offences may have occurred. The investigation runs separately from the trust’s internal review, which is focused on identifying affected patients and examining their clinical care.
For women whose records are being reviewed, the process may involve difficult conversations about diagnoses, surgery and treatment decisions made in the past. The trust’s findings so far show that the concerns are not limited to a small number of isolated cases.
The proposed expansion of the review to 2015 would substantially increase its scope. It could offer more former patients an opportunity to understand whether their care was affected, while also deepening scrutiny of the breast unit’s practices over a longer period.
As the reviews and investigations continue, many of the women involved are seeking more than an apology. They want answers about how avoidable harm occurred, accountability for decisions made within the service, and reassurance that future breast cancer patients will receive safe, transparent and properly supported care.
Related Reading
Frequently Asked Questions
What is Twenty women had breasts removed needlessly?
Twenty women had breasts removed needlessly is the main topic of this guide. The article explains the context, practical details, and next steps readers should understand.
Why does Twenty women had breasts removed needlessly matter?
Twenty women had breasts removed needlessly matters because readers are looking for a useful answer, not just a short summary. Good content should match search intent and help them decide what to do next.