Doctor Philippe Wilmes is "100 per cent" certain that he has never operated on a healthy cruciate ligament or a healthy joint, his lawyer Maître François Prüm declared at a press conference on Friday. The statement came in direct response to a report by three foreign experts who concluded that Wilmes had operated on intact cruciate ligaments in 10 examined cases and accused him of mutilating his patients.
At least one of those patients tells a different story. The 22-year-old anonymous high-performance athlete, who also attended the press conference, said a mutilation claim is entirely unfounded in her case. She had spent two years unable to walk or compete after being misdiagnosed and twice operated on for a meniscus injury at another clinic, only to be told her remaining option was full meniscus removal – a procedure that would have ended her sporting career. After switching to Doctor Wilmes, who operated on her on 19th December last year, she has been satisfied with her recovery. "So in my case, one absolutely cannot speak of mutilation, and I also do not think it is right that my file is essentially being used against Doctor Wilmes without my consent."
Several orthopaedic surgeons who have worked with Wilmes for years also backed him at the press conference. Doctors Mehlen, Garbrecht and Huberty criticised the foreign experts for basing their conclusions solely on MRI scans, arguing that a proper diagnosis requires a full picture – including patient history, clinical examination, and direct conversation with the patient.
Among them was Doctor Jacques Mehlen, who does not perform surgery himself but has routinely referred patients he cannot treat with conservative methods to Wilmes. He said he had never had cause for concern. "So I was never in a situation where I had to doubt a surgical indication, or where I thought something was happening that was not in order or illegal."
Wilmes himself went further, alleging that his rights have been violated from the outset of the affair. He claims he has been given no opportunity to defend himself, has been treated as guilty from the start, and that official institutions – specifically the Medical Council and the Ministry of Health – have been complicit in this treatment.
