Mark Welland, a 61‑year‑old retired postman from Isleworth, underwent major surgery at London’s Royal Marsden Hospital in October 2020 after doctors told him a pancreatic mass was cancerous. post‑operative analysis revealed the lesion was benign, yet the operation removed 40 % of his pancreas and his entire spleen, leaving him with lifeloong health issues and an early retirement.

Royal Marsden’s October 2020 Surgery Turned Into an Open Procedure

The operation began as a keyhole (laparoscopic) removal of the suspected tumor, but severe bleeding forced surgeons to convert to an open surgery, losing 3.5 litres of blood. According to the court filings,the emergency conversion led to the removal of a large portion of Welland’s pancreas and his whole spleen.

Benign Splenunculus Misidentified as Cancer

Histology later identified the pancreatic nodule as a splenunculus, an accessory spleen that is common and non‑malignant. The Royal Marsden admitted in October 2023 that it breached its duty by failing to offer a “watch and wait” surveillance option, a claim echoed by Welland’s lawyers at Stone Rowe Brewer.

Informed‑Consent Failures Highlighted by Surgeon’s Late Disclosure

Welland alleges consultant surgeon Richy Bhogal only warned him of a 20 % chance of losing his spleen after he had been anaesthetised, and never mentioned the inconclusive endoscopic ultrasound or negative biopsy results.. As the source reports, this omission denied him the chance to consider less invasive monitoring.

Long‑Term Consequences: Lifelong Antibiotics, Diabetes Risk, and Early Retirement

Removal of the spleen obliges Welland to take antibiotics indefinitely to guard against sepsis, while the partial pancreatectomy raises his risk of diabetes. He also suffers chronic abdominal pain, weight gain, and limited mobility that prevent him from driving or wearing a seatbelt, forcing him to retire from his postman job.

Who Still Needs to Respond? The Trust’s Silence Amid a £400,000 Claim

The High Court claim seeks £400,000 in damages for negligence, but the Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust has not yet filed a formal defence. A hospital spokesperson said the matter is ongoing and no comment could be provided, as noted in the reporting.