Transplant surgeon previously charged with incompetence is fined $5,000 by board

The Iowa Board of Medicine has fined a Des Moines surgeon previously accused of posing an immediate danger to the public.

Dr. Qasim L. Chaudhry has been fined $5,000 by the board, according to state records. Chaudhry, who has been an Iowa-licensed physician since June 2010, is the former director of the Iowa Methodist Transplant Center and has also served as the surgical director of the Iowa Donor Network.

In public filings earlier this year, the Board of Medicine alleged it had received complaints related to Chaudhry’s practice of medicine and concluded he had failed to meet the required standard of care “in multiple patients and that failure led to significant harm” to patients.

The board said Chaudhry “poses an immediate danger to the public,” adding that it found it necessary to immediately suspend Chaudhry’s medical license through an emergency adjudicative order. The suspension was “necessary to protect the public health, safety, or welfare until this case is resolved due the severity of the potential consequences of (Chaudhry) practicing medicine in a surgical or clinical setting,” the board stated, adding that the imposition of any other “interim safeguards would not be sufficient to protect the public.”

Chaudhry was then charged by the board with professional incompetence and with knowingly making misleading, deceptive, untrue, or fraudulent representations in the practice of medicine.

On Feb. 5 and 6, 2026, the matter was the subject of a closed-door hearing before three members of the board — Dr. Jerry Rozeboom, Dr. Robert Donnelly, and the board’s public representative, Diane McDonald. It was only after all of the evidence was presented and the case was submitted for deliberation that it was discovered that under Iowa law, disciplinary hearings are to be attended by a panel of “not less than three board members who are licensed in the profession.”

Because the board was not lawfully empaneled, it was decided in late February that the matter should be rescheduled for another two-day hearing. At the time, the board also stated that it had “received additional information to negate the need for an emergency suspension” of Chaudhry’s license and it lifted his license suspension, allowing Chaudhry to resume his practice.

Eventually, the parties agreed to accept as evidence all of the information and testimony already presented to the board, and the board closing arguments in the case on April 17, 2026.

Treatment of two patients questioned 

Newly disclosed board records indicate the board’s case against Chaudhry involved complaints regarding his treatment of two patients with liver disease, identified in the records by their initials, R.B. and R.C.

In the case of R.C., the complainant alleged that the 79-year-old man was not healthy enough to have the surgery Chaudhry performed and that Chaudhry failed to provide adequate post-op care. The surgery was intended to address hundreds of cysts on R.C.’s liver and to repair a hernia.

At his hearing, Chaudhry allegedly informed the board that he often takes patients who are the sickest or most difficult to treat, with an expected high rate of surgical complications. “I am very careful to advise patients of this, but for many this is their only option or last hope!” the board quotes Chaudhry as saying.

According to the board, a peer review examination of the case resulted in findings that Chaudhry failed to meet the expected standard of care in several respects, including his decision to transfer R.C., after surgery, to a a care facility that had limited capabilities for dealing with “an obvious wound complication.” R.C. died after being transferred to the facility, according to the board.

The board concluded the state, represented in this case by board staff and the attorney general’s office, failed to prove any regulatory violations with regard to the care Chaudhry provided R.C.

Board: No license suspension warranted  

In the case of R.B., a 69-year-old man with liver cancer, it was alleged by the complainant that Chaudhry didn’t complete an operation on the patient and failed to put a surgical drain in place, allowing fluid to fill the patient’s abdominal cavity resulting in readmission to the hospital and death. In response, Chaudhry argued the surgical procedure was exploratory in nature and that the fluid buildup was the result of advanced cancer and would not have been alleviated by a surgical drain.

According to the board, a peer review examination of the case resulted in findings that Chaudhry failed to meet the expected standard of care in several respects, including ignoring the recommendations of an oncologist.

With regard to R.B.’s care, the board concluded Chaudhry failed to inform the patient about the “relatively high possibility” that the surgery would be purely exploratory and that the proposed resectioning of the patient’s liver would not be possible. The board also concluded Chaudhry “knowingly provided misleading representations” to R.B. and his wife about the likelihood of a successful resectioning of the liver.

Those failures, the board concluded, did not negatively impact the patient’s prognosis or course of cancer treatment.

“The board does not conclude that any period of (license) suspension is warranted under the circumstances,” the board stated in its decision. Instead, the board concluded, a $5,000 civil penalty warranted.

In recent years, Chaudhry was named in three medical malpractice lawsuits filed by patients or their families alleging negligent care, which Chaudhry denied. All three cases were eventually dismissed. In one case, court records show the matter was dropped after an out-of-court settlement was reached. In the two remaining cases, the lawsuits were dropped with no indication of whether a settlement was involved.