The Medical Practitioners Tribunal has issued a further ruling in the case of leading pelvic floor surgeon, Anthony Dixon.
The Medical Practitioners Tribunal has delivered its second determination on the fitness to practice assessment for Mr Anthony Dixon, a former Consultant Colorectal Surgeon who was once regarded as a leader in pelvic floor surgery.
Mr Dixon has attracted widespread attention over the last 10 years, following patients coming forward alleging unnecessary procedures and poor outcomes. The Tribunal handed down its findings of fact in a previous fitness to practice assessment last year, which resulted in Mr Dixon being suspended for a further 6 months. A second tribunal was convened, commencing in May 2025, and the Tribunal’s latest findings mark a critical moment in the wider scrutiny of Mr Dixon’s ongoing fitness to practice.
In this most recent Tribunal, it focused on concerns about Mr Dixon’s clinical decision making and the accuracy of medical records submitted during the subsequent internal investigation reviews conducted by Spire Healthcare, and the ensuing legal proceedings.
The Tribunal concluded that Mr Dixon had, from 2007 to 2022, failed to meet the standards expected of a medical professional. The Tribunal found serious concerns in relation to:
- The failure of Mr Dixon to adequately explain surgical complications to one patient following a re-look operation. The patient was left with a long-standing and mistaken belief that he had nearly died from internal bleeding. The Tribunal ruled that this amounted to a failure to provide an adequate post-operative explanation.
- The creation (or the allowance of medical records to be created) after his involvement in the patient’s care had ended. The Tribunal found that in several of the patients’ care that was considered, Mr Dixon’s actions were misleading and dishonest, as they gave the false impression that the documents were contemporaneous medical records.
Several other allegations of poor clinical care, including the failure to consider non-surgical options and performing procedures without sufficient investigation, were found not proven by the Tribunal. Expert witnesses agreed that while Mr Dixon’s practice often sat at the more interventionist end of the acceptable clinical spectrum, it remained within professional standards in many cases.
Now that the Tribunal has made its findings on the facts, it will consider whether Mr Dixon’s fitness to practise is impaired. This decision will determine whether he is allowed to continue practising medicine in the UK.
In that phase, the Tribunal will consider:
- Whether the proven facts amount to serious misconduct,
- The impact on public confidence in the medical profession,
- Whether Mr Dixon has shown insight, remediation, or contrition.
If the Tribunal determines that Mr Dixon’s fitness to practise is impaired, it has a range of sanctions at its disposal, including conditions on practice to suspension or erasure from the medical register.
We will continue to monitor the final stages of the hearing and provide updates as the Tribunal reaches its conclusion on impairment and possible sanctions. Caroline Webber-Brown and her team remain ready to support these patients in their pursuit of justice.
