A PENSIONER was 'robbed' of his only working kidney by two surgeons in an operating theatre 'disaster', the GMC heard yesterday.

Mahesh Goel, 41, a former locum at Burnley General Hospital, faces being struck off if he is found guilty of serious professional misconduct by the General Medical Council.

John Graham Reeves, 69, died five weeks after the 'catastrophic error' at the Prince Philip Hospital, Llanelli, South Wales, in January, 2000.

Consultant urologist John Gethin Roberts, 61, from Swansea, faces the same charge after he supervised the procedure.

Roberts, a consultant of more than 20 years experience, admits he was 'incompetent' for depriving Mr Reeves, a retired power station pipe lagger and Korean War veteran, of his healthy left kidney.

Leighton Davies, barrister for the GMC, said that Roberts stated two hours after the mistake was discovered: "I decided to review all the X-rays and it became obvious the wrong kidney had been removed."

Mr Davies said: "This is evidence from the horse's mouth and there is no suggestion the X-rays misled Roberts in anyway at all in the sense they were incorrectly labelled."

Mr Davies insisted both surgeons - Goel has not attended the hearing - were guilty of serious professional misconduct.

He said: "This 69-year-old's left-sided kidney that was keeping him alive was deprived, robbed, robbing him of his renal function.

"He was condemned to live the rest of his days, such as they were, on dialysis."

Mr Davies said the surgeons failed in a 'fundamental duty' - to check Mr Reeves' medical notes.

He added: "What is so remarkable about this case, what is so incredible, it was not an emergency operation - it was not an operation being carried out at an advanced dressing station at the Battle of Somme - there was no pressure of time at all.

"It was a relatively light operating list, what was the rush? There was no pressure of time and what is incredible is that Mr Reeves' notes were readily available."

The barrister said it would have taken no more than a few minutes to check the notes and ascertain the correct kidney to be removed was 'the right-sided one.'

He added: "It is inexcusable the notes were not looked at; inexcusable Roberts did not ask Goel if he had checked the notes that morning; and inexcusable Roberts was not asked by Goel."

A 'few moments' would not have deprived the patient of his only working kidney. "But Mr Reeves' notes may well have been on the moon. They were totally ignored."

Mr Davies said the conduct of both men must be viewed as serious. "This was unprofessional misconduct of the most unacceptable kind."

The hearing continues