NHS Surgeon Investigation: 209 Patients Reportedly Harmed at Cambridge Hospital

An external clinical review into former NHS surgeon Kuldeep Stohr has reportedly identified harm involving 209 patients at Addenbrooke's Hospital, including one fatal case.

Former NHS surgeon under investigation after review identifies patient harm

A major NHS hospital in Cambridge is facing renewed scrutiny after an external clinical review reportedly found that 209 patients experienced harm while under the care of former orthopaedic consultant Kuldeep Stohr.

The investigation concerns treatment provided at Addenbrooke's Hospital, part of Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Trust. According to an update from the trust, 924 patient cases had been reviewed, representing 93 per cent of the cases included in the investigation.

Of those reviewed, 889 patients had reportedly been informed of the outcome of their individual review.

The figures emerged after an interim update from the external clinical review was mistakenly included in publicly available board papers. The trust subsequently acknowledged the publication and said it was contacting affected patients and their families.

The review is expected to provide a fuller picture of what happened and confirm the final levels of patient harm.

One child died following surgery

Among the cases being examined is that of nine-year-old Jack Moate, who died in November 2015 after undergoing complex hip surgery at Addenbrooke's Hospital.

Jack had several complex medical needs and limited mobility. According to reports, his operation lasted almost eight hours.

He died within two months of the surgery.

The hospital trust has said Jack's case has been referred to the coroner. His case forms part of a wider examination of surgical care provided by Stohr.

The reported findings have raised serious questions about the treatment of children undergoing elective orthopaedic procedures and about whether earlier concerns were adequately addressed.

Investigation expanded from nine children to nearly 1,000 cases

The investigation initially focused on a much smaller number of patients.

An early review reportedly identified nine children who had received substandard care. The scope was later expanded substantially, eventually covering nearly 1,000 patients.

The latest available figures stated that 924 cases had been reviewed.

The trust said that 209 patients had experienced harm, with most of those affected being children at the time they underwent elective surgery.

Of those 209 patients, 47 were classified as having experienced severe harm. One case was classified as fatal.

The figures remain subject to the completion of the external clinical review, meaning the final numbers could change once all cases have been assessed.

Concerns about surgical practice had been raised years earlier

Questions surrounding Stohr's work reportedly date back to 2015.

An external clinical review was carried out in 2016 after concerns were raised about aspects of her surgical practice.

A separate independent review that reported last year reportedly found that the earlier review had raised concerns about Stohr's surgical technique and clinical judgment.

However, the later review concluded that the findings of the 2016 investigation had been misunderstood and that opportunities to act on the concerns had been missed.

This has become a central issue in the wider examination because it raises questions about how concerns regarding a clinician's performance are identified, communicated and acted upon within healthcare organisations.

Surgeon has not worked clinically since 2024

Stohr has not worked clinically since March 2024, according to the reported information.

Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Trust suspended her from her role in February 2025.

The suspension and removal from clinical work came as concerns about her previous treatment were being examined through the wider investigation.

The current review is chaired by Andrew Kennedy KC and is expected to be completed later in 2026.

The trust has said patients and families will receive the final report before it is made publicly available.

NHS trust apologises to affected patients and families

Nicola Ayton, chief executive of Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Trust, said the organisation was writing to affected patients and families to apologise and explain what had happened.

The trust said it was deeply sorry to people who had experienced harm or received care below the standard they should have expected.

It also stated that changes were being made to reduce the possibility of similar failures happening again.

The accidental publication of the interim review added another layer of concern. According to the trust, the confidential document had been included in public board papers by mistake.

The organisation said the published material did not contain patient-identifiable information or details of individual cases.

What happens next?

The most significant next step will be completion of the external clinical review.

The final report is expected to provide confirmed levels of patient harm and a more detailed assessment of the cases examined.

Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Trust has said affected patients and families will be given access to the findings before the report is published in full.

The outcome could help establish a clearer timeline of events, explain how earlier concerns were handled and identify changes that may be required to improve patient safety.

For families involved, however, the review is more than an administrative process. It could provide answers about the treatment their relatives received and explain why concerns that had reportedly been identified years earlier did not lead to earlier intervention.

Why the case matters for NHS patient safety

The investigation highlights the importance of effective clinical governance within the NHS.

Healthcare organisations rely on systems that allow concerns about treatment, surgical technique and professional judgment to be identified and investigated promptly. When concerns are raised, they also need to be clearly communicated to senior staff and acted upon where necessary.

The reported findings at Addenbrooke's Hospital demonstrate why independent reviews can be important when questions remain about a clinician's care and the response of an organisation.

They also underline the importance of transparency with patients and families when serious concerns emerge.

Until the external review is completed, the full circumstances surrounding the reported cases remain under examination. The final report should therefore be considered an important source for understanding what happened and what lessons can be learned.

Key facts at a glance

• Hospital: Addenbrooke's Hospital, Cambridge
• NHS organisation: Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Trust
• Clinician: Former orthopaedic consultant Kuldeep Stohr
• Cases under review: Nearly 1,000
• Cases reviewed: 924
• Patients informed: 889
• Patients reportedly experiencing harm: 209
• Severe harm cases: 47
• Fatal cases: 1
• Child who died: Nine-year-old Jack Moate
• Initial concerns: Reportedly raised in 2015
• External review: Conducted in 2016, with further independent scrutiny later
• Clinical work ended: March 2024
• Suspension: February 2025
• Expected completion of current external review: Later in 2026

The case remains subject to the ongoing external clinical review. The final findings are expected to provide further information about the individual cases, the extent of patient harm and the actions that should be taken to prevent similar problems in the future.

Source: The Sun on September 9, 2026, based on information attributed to Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Trust and its external clinical review.

Disclaimer: This article is intended for informational purposes only. The reported findings and allegations concerning clinical care are presented as reported and attributed to the relevant sources. They should not be interpreted as a final legal or professional determination of individual responsibility. The external clinical review remains ongoing, and figures or conclusions may change when the final report is completed.