Charlie Teo seethes as he’s grilled over whether he cut into too much of a patient’s brain

Star neurosurgeon Charlie Teo has exploded at a disciplinary hearing when he was repeatedly asked if he cut too much into a patient’s brain when removing a tumor – admitting he had “damaged” the woman beyond repair.

Dr. Teo returned to the witness stand in Sydney on Monday for a hearing against the Health Care Complaints Commission (HCCC) over two surgeries he performed that left patients with catastrophic brain injuries.

Both female patients, named Patient A and Patient B, had terminal brain tumors and had only weeks or months to live. They were both left in a vegetative state and died shortly after Dr. Teo performed surgery to remove their tumors.

Dr. Teo has a reputation as a brain surgeon willing to perform risky surgeries and has a legion of followers, but has come under fire from members of the medical establishment for his alleged behavior and surgical practices.

A panel of legal and medical experts is investigating Dr. Teo’s conduct, including whether he adequately informed his patients about the risks.

When the hearing resumed Monday morning, committee attorney Kate Richardson SC repeatedly asked Dr. Teo during cross-examination whether he had cut the midline of Patient A’s brain.

She asked if he would accept telling the patient’s husband that he didn’t know where the midline of the brain was and “cut across the line and damaged the other side.”

Dr. Teo grew visibly frustrated and interjected, “Look, we can fix this – I did something wrong.”

“Obviously I damaged this lady, and I damaged this lady because I went too far into the brain. Whatever happened, I take full responsibility that it was my hand, my technique, my doing that she didn’t wake up.

The point is that I made a mistake. A surgical error and I went too far and I made a mistake. No one disputes that.’

Previously, Dr Teo agreed that it was not intentional to operate across the midline, but responded when asked if it was an ‘accident’.

‘An accident? There are no accidents during an operation. You’re guessing,” Dr. Teo said.

“It can be difficult to determine where the tumor ends and the normal brain begins.”

Dr. However, Teo agreed with Richardson when she asked if he agreed with an expert’s opinion when he described the surgery as a “radical resection.”

Previously, Dr Teo agreed it was not intentional to operate across the midline, but fired back when asked if it was an ‘accident’

Ms. Richardson then asked if he deliberately went beyond the amplifying area, where the tumor was located in Patient A’s brain.

Dr. Teo replied, ‘I wanted to stick with the fortification area, but it’s hard to say and I sometimes get off track.

“It can be tolerated in some parts of the brain, but clearly not in this patient… I think that’s why she didn’t recover.”

Earlier on Monday, Associate Professor Andrew Morokoff said it was his assessment that Dr Teo went “beyond the midsection of the brain” when operating on patient A – but could not say whether it was intentional.

“It would be very risky and unreasonable to go beyond the tumor,” he said.

“Going beyond the enhancing part of the tumor in this area would be very risky.”

However, he told the hearing that it was “difficult to say” whether Dr. Teo intentionally went past the midline, because the tumor went down both sides and it can be difficult to tell where the midline is.

“I don’t know if you can tell from the scan what was intentional and what wasn’t,” he said.

The hearing continues.