Surgeon Charlie Teo guilty of unsatisfactory conduct

Samantha Lock | July 12, 2023

High-profile neurosurgeon Charlie Teo has been found guilty of unsatisfactory professional conduct and accused of having a “substantially experimental” attitude while operating on two patients at a Sydney hospital.

The star surgeon will need written support from another specialist before performing certain procedures after an investigation by the NSW Health Care Complaints Commission.

The commission ordered that Dr Teo, who is known for taking on risky cases after other surgeons have declined to operate, be reprimanded and imposed conditions on his registration.

The health watchdog investigated complaints relating to two patients diagnosed with terminal brain tumours who had catastrophic outcomes.

Neither patient regained consciousness after surgery undertaken in 2018 and 2019 at Sydney’s Prince of Wales Private Hospital.

During eight days of hearings in March, Dr Teo faced accusations of misleading patients, conducting dangerous surgeries and failing to properly inform them or their families of the risks involved.

The commission’s Medical Professional Standards Committee found the surgeon decided to operate on two patients “where the risk of surgery outweighed any potential benefits”.

The committee found he did not obtain informed consent from either woman prior to surgery and charged an inappropriate fee of $35,000 for one as well as speaking inappropriately to the same patient’s daughter post-surgery.

The committee concluded in its 112-page report Dr Teo “did not exercise appropriate judgment” in proceeding to what it deemed to be a “high risk and inappropriate” surgery on a 41-year-old woman.

“Surgery in this situation is not recommended or carried out by a majority of the practitioner’s peers, nor a responsible minority of surgeons,” it read. 

“The procedure was not supported by the literature (and) the practitioner in his professional capacity had an overriding ethical duty to refuse surgery.” 

The committee found Dr Teo’s attitude to and rationale for conducting the surgery was “substantially experimental” and was the type of surgery which should be conducted in a clinical trial setting or subject to other ethical scrutiny. 

When operating on another patient, he was found to have “carried out surgery which was different to that proposed”.

The surgery ultimately “led to unwarranted and excessive removal of normal functional brain”. 

A number of elements relating to informed consent were also found to be lacking.

During the hearing Dr Teo admitted his actions were responsible for the women’s poor outcomes, but firmly rejected any suggestion he was negligent.

“I haven’t been able to save lives that I know I can save,” he said.

Dr Teo will have to obtain a written statement from a Medical Council-approved neurosurgeon to support him performing recurrent malignant intracranial tumour and brain stem tumour surgical procedures. 

“If the written statement does not support Professor Teo performing the procedure(s) he cannot perform the surgery,” the commission said in a statement on Wednesday. 

During the inquiry, there were 47 letters of support from former patients and their families and more than 100 pages of social media messages in support of the surgeon. 

His lawyer Matthew Hutchings told AAP he had not yet read the commission’s full decision and no decision had been made about an appeal.

Dr Teo has the right to appeal the decision to the NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal within 28 days.