Dr. Jessica Charlotte Gooch, MD

WHEN PRECISION FAILS – MY LUMPECTOMY EXPERIENCE The standard of care of a lumpectomy is "the surgical practice of removing only the cancerous breast tumor and a *small margin* of surrounding tissue." Read my surgery description below and make your own judgement. During my lumpectomy, the surgeon missed the Savi Scout marker and excised 48 cc of healthy breast tissue initially. When the Savi Scout was not found in the first excision. Then the surgeon performed a second excision of 10 cc of tissue that contained the entire tumor and the Savi Scout marker, all during the same surgery. The pathology confirmed that the first excision of 48 cc had no cancer. Savi Scout aided surgeries are precise ~ 97% (see article doi: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2018.07.008), the first excision was not needed to treat my cancer, it was a surgical mistake for which I received no explanation for except that ‘it is not uncommon to have two excisions.’ During the initial consultation with her I was told that my… surgery was straightforward and that I would not need reconstruction – this is longer be the case given that a large piece of healthy tissue was removed from my small (32B) breast. Just for perspective, the no-cancer first excision was almost five times the volume of the excision with the actual tumor. Dr. Gooch caused extra trauma in my body that was nor required. When mistakes happen, a good surgeon takes responsibility, offers solutions, and ensures their patient is supported. This surgeon did none of that.

FAILURE OF SURGICAL PRECISION AND POST-OPERATIVE ACCOUNTABILITY A. FACTUAL ACCOUNT OF THE SURGERY: I had a challenging and highly concerning experience during my breast cancer lumpectomy with Dr. Jessica Gooch. This account is based on my official surgical and pathology reports. 1. Failure of Guidance Technology: Before surgery, a marker (SAVI SCOUT) was placed in my tumor for precision. This marker is an effective tool (typically 97% accurate on the first try) for locating the cancer. 2. The Mistake: The surgeon performed a first excision intending to remove the tumor, but an intra-operative X-ray confirmed the marker was missed. The surgeon, by mistake, had cut and removed a large mass of healthy breast tissue. 3. Unnecessary Trauma: The surgeon then had to perform a second excision to finally remove the cancer and the marker. My pathology report confirmed that the first piece of tissue removed had no cancer at all and was almost five times the size (48 cc) of the tissue that… actually contained the tumor (10 cc). The marker was centrally located in the tumor, confirming the targeting team had done a precise job. The removal of 48 cc of tissue was not required for my cancer treatment; it was a mistake made by Dr. Gooch. 4. Cosmetic Damage: This unnecessary removal of so much tissue from my small breast (32B-34B) caused significant distortion. The standard of care for lumpectomy is to remove only the tumor and a small margin. My surgery deviated drastically from this standard. Dr. Gooch lacked accuracy as a surgeon. B. FAILURE OF POST-OPERATIVE SUPPORT AND ACCOUNTABILITY: The support and communication I received after the mistake was made the entire experience deeply traumatic. 1. Lack of Communication: After reading the surgery report that described this surgical error, I asked the surgeon to call me to explain the two excisions, but she did not. 2. Dismissive Responses: When I reached out via message, I received curt, uninformative answers. When I asked about tissue rearrangement (an oncoplastic technique to prevent cosmetic deformity), her only response was, "no significant tissue rearrangement was done," with no explanation. 3. No Accountability: I was left with a distorted breast requiring years of multiple, staged reconstructive procedures to fix the tissue loss. The surgeon offered no support, no guidance, and no referrals for reconstruction. CONCLUSION: Dr. Gooch made a mistake in my surgery; she lacked surgical accuracy. A good surgeon takes responsibility, offers solutions, and ensures their patient is supported when a mistake happens. This surgeon did none of that. The lack of surgical accuracy was compounded by a profound lack of compassion and accountability after the fact. Future patients deserve better.