| 5.8°C Dublin

Tycoon's daughter settles court fight after surgery she claimed left her with odd breasts

THE daughter of a property tycoon has settled a High Court action for undisclosed damages over allegedly botched breast reduction surgery.

Kissandra MacAnthony, the daughter of Austin MacAnthony of International MacAnthony Realty, sued Advanced Cosmetic Surgery Ltd and Dr Samy Malhas.

She claimed she suffered an infection and that an implant inserted in her right side exacerbated an unsightly "asymmetry between her breasts".

The defendants then performed corrective surgery in a negligent manner resulting in an unsatisfactory result, she claimed.


The case was due for a full hearing in the High Court when barrister Richard Kean, for Ms MacAnthony, told Mr Justice John Quirke the case had been settled and could be struck out.

The defendants had denied the claims and the settlement was without admission of liability.

Advanced Cosmetic Surgery Ltd is now in liquidation.

Ms MacAnthony, of Stepaside Park, Stepaside, Dublin, claimed that on October 22, 2004, she underwent treatment for breast reduction surgery under full general anaesthetic.

She got further treatment on November 16 and 29 in 2004 and on May 17, 2005, she underwent reconstructive treatment at the clinic.

She claimed that during the treatment, the defendants failed to properly diagnose or provide aftercare or follow-up treatment and failed in their duty of care to her.

The woman said that as a result she developed nipple necrosis and that there was a failure to adequately deal with this condition.

She was extremely concerned as she had been informed she might lose a large part of one of her breasts. She was also in extreme pain.

She alleged she was discharged from care without the defendants properly diagnosing or carrying out the appropriate diagnostic tests or examination.

Ms MacAnthony says they should have known or ought to have known she was suffering from nipple necrosis and was at risk of developing an infection.


The alleged failure to provide adequate treatment when she developed nipple necrosis placed her at risk of secondary infection, she claimed.

Despite the nature and size of the wound, they failed to take any steps to remove the necrotic tissue for a substantial period and she then had to seek independent medical advice.

The clinic denied advising on the treatment concerning breast reduction surgery or failed to properly diagnose or provide aftercare or follow up treatment.

It also denied its servants or agents failed in their duty of care to Ms MacAnthony.

Dr Malhas denied he failed to advise her of the risks involved in such surgery.