After it was revealed on Tuesday that the suspension of Dr Philippe Wilmes would be extended by 21 months, his lawyer has now claimed that the expert assessment on which the decision is based is incomplete.
Dr Philippe Wilmes, an orthopaedic surgeon, is not permitted to operate for a further 21 months. Minister of Health Martine Deprez announced the extension after receiving the expert report.
Wilmes had already been suspended for three months. He is accused of having operated on healthy cruciate ligaments. The case involves ten specific incidents that three experts were tasked with evaluating. Following receipt of their report, Minister Deprez announced on Tuesday that Wilmes would remain partially suspended for an additional 21 months. This means the doctor may still hold consultations but is not allowed to perform surgery.
“He had no chance to free himself from the experts’ preconceived views”, said François Prum, the lawyer representing Wilmes.
The experts were asked to analyse three points: whether the knee joint was healthy, whether an intervention was necessary, and what the consequences of the intervention were. “Nobody goes to the doctor with a healthy knee”, Prum said, setting the context. He criticised the fact that the experts looked exclusively at MRI scans during their analysis, arguing that MRI is just one of several diagnostic tools used to determine whether an intervention is justified.
“For them, it was the MRI and nothing else but the MRIs”, Prum stated. He claimed that the cases were not simply about whether a cruciate ligament was healthy or diseased, but about the entire knee joint. During an arthroscopy, he argued, one can often see more clearly what is happening – yet those images were not reviewed.
According to the lawyer, two different worlds are colliding. On one side are medical professionals who view the matter in a highly specialised way, and on the other are those – as he characterises it – who do not. He counts those who side with Dr Wilmes among the former. Prum said he and the doctor have consulted specialists from the United States, France, and Luxembourg, among others, for their own assessment. He claims that all of them criticise the report produced by the three French experts.
The expert report was completed on 17 April. On 16 April, Wilmes was given the opportunity to present his case before the experts via video conference between 7pm and 9pm. However, Prum claims they only got as far as the fourth case, which involved a patient who had been “extremely satisfied” with the outcome of the intervention. After that, Wilmes was allegedly told that they were going round in circles, and the consultation was ended.
“They had written the assessment. It was simply ready, and they just wanted to discuss it with Dr Wilmes for form’s sake. But they had already made up their minds”, the lawyer alleged.
Additionally, Prum criticised that witness statements from assistants who were present during the interventions, as well as surgical reports with images from the arthroscopies, were not considered by the experts. He claimed the report lacks detail, stating that the ten cases were not dealt with individually but were “copy-pasted” from one case to the next.
Regarding the next steps, Prum said they now need to determine how to proceed. The report, he argued, cannot be accepted as it stands, describing the two-year ban on performing surgeries as “a severe decision”.
Wilmes and his lawyer plan to seek another expert report to demonstrate that the three experts had misinterpreted the situation. Wilmes maintains that the report is wrong and that the interventions were necessary in all cases. Prum reiterated that among the cases were patients who were “very satisfied” and subsequently returned to the doctor.
Wilmes and his lawyer may challenge the minister’s decision, which was based on the report. Through this challenge, they hope a new report will be produced, leading to a different decision either by the minister herself or by the administrative court.
Separately, an investigation by the Medical Board into disciplinary proceedings against Dr Wilmes is currently underway. 30 cases brought before the board are being analysed. Minister Deprez has now set the partial suspension at a total of two years to allow this disciplinary investigation to be carried out.
In this context, the lawyer hopes that a more detailed investigation will be conducted and that his client’s innocence can be proven.
