A father-of-six who had his testicles removed due to a flesh-eating bacteria infection has lost his High Court fight.

Stuart Dalchow, 55, brought a claim against St George’s University NHS Foundation Trust after he had two orchidectomies after developing Fournier gangrene, a form of the flesh-eating bacteria necrotising fasciitis which largely affects the genital area.

During a four-day hearing in November, the High Court heard that Mr Dalchow had a “routine and uncomplicated” surgery to remove a 3cm cyst on his scrotum in April 2015.

The Chelsea FC fan went to St George’s Hospital in London early the next morning with severe pain and by about 8.30am had begun to lose sensation in his scrotum.

  • READ MORE: Catford food store owner threatened with kitchen knife as suspects steal cigarettes

In a judgment on Thursday, Deputy High Court judge Hugh Southey QC said Mr Dalchow’s treatment included being assessed by a doctor at 11am before being examined by a more experienced consultant an hour later.

The examination resulted in an antibiotic prescription that was not dispensed.

“There is no dispute that this amounted to a breach of duty,” Judge Southey said.

Mr Dalchow had an ultrasound shortly after 3pm and was reviewed again after 6pm, when he was diagnosed with necrotising fasciitis, taken to theatre for treatment of the flesh-eating bacteria and had his right testicle removed.

Less than three months later, he was readmitted and his left testicle was also removed.

While Mr Dalchow did not argue that his necrotising fasciitis should have been diagnosed at 11am, he claimed a delay in administering antibiotics and carrying out an urgent ultrasound contributed to his injury.

The trust said that while it accepted there had been a breach of duty by not starting antibiotics at 12pm, it denied a breach over the speed of the ultrasound and said it would not have led to an earlier diagnosis of necrotising fasciitis.

In a judgment on Thursday, Judge Southey dismissed Mr Dalchow’s claim, finding that while the trust had breached its duty, it could not be proved that the breach caused his loss.

He found that even if an ultrasound had taken place earlier, there was no evidence that Mr Dalchow would have been taken for surgery to treat the infection any quicker than he actually was.

The court heard that the “key” to Mr Dalchow’s diagnosis was skin breakdown, “which had not been present at midday and therefore was of rapid onset”.

One of the doctors involved said that the ultrasound scan’s findings alone would not have led to a diagnosis of necrotising fasciitis.

Judge Southey said: “This evidence means that I find, applying the balance of probabilities, that the claimant would not have been taken to theatre following an earlier report from the ultrasound scan… there is no evidence that would have been any quicker than when he did go to theatre.”

The court also heard that antibiotics alone are of limited use once necrosis starts, as antibiotics will not be able to get to the source of infection due to decayed blood vessels.

“It appears to me that the evidence about the effectiveness of antibiotics means that no loss can be established once I have rejected the claim that surgery should have been commenced earlier,” Judge Southey said.

He continued: “Although it appears to me that breach of duty has been established, including breach of duty not admitted, it cannot be proved that the breach of duty caused loss.

“I am sure that that conclusion will disappoint Mr Dalchow.

“Mr Dalchow has plainly suffered life-changing injury following routine surgery when he developed Fournier gangrene. I hope that the trial process has helped him and all who treated him to understand what happened.”

Have you got a story for us? You can contact us here.

Follow us on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram to keep up with all the latest news.

Sign up to our newsletters to get updates sent straight to your inbox.