From:
Hemal Dhirajlal shah
10519 Pickerel lane
Charlotte
NC 28213
04-19-1967 DOB
xxx-X0-0872
980-451-2605 Mobile
Subject Wrongfully remove Good Corneal (MRN:
On March 3rd, the doctor stated that surgery would be performed and asked for a follow-up visit a month later. Dr. Li Weiley (Referral) and Dr. Matthew Giegengack.
During the second appointment on April 7th, it was revealed that a specific type of eye surgery was required—specifically, the insertion of a gas bubble to help the transplanted tissue adhere properly. It was explained that the cornea needed to attach; the underlying issue was a deficiency in the eye structure, which was causing poor vision. At the time, I did not fully understand the details—such as what a cornea actually is—until later. The necessity of the surgery was presented based on the claim that corneal transplantation was required due to swelling in the eye. However, this reasoning might have been flawed; the root cause was actually a hard cataract. Had that hard cataract been removed, the corneal transplant might not have been necessary at all. Had the transplant been avoided and the cataract removed instead, I might have regained good vision without complications; instead, the exact opposite occurred. I visited the hospital in Bermuda Run for a corneal transplant. I wasn't fully aware of the details regarding the procedure—specifically, I wondered if I might have lost my vision had I undergone cataract surgery instead. I frequently asked the doctor why a gas bubble was used; the explanation given was that it helps the tissue adhere to the cornea, though that isn't the complete or accurate answer.
I This facility is highly regarded for corneal transplants; it is widely known for these procedures and the associated patient care, rather than for cataract surgeries. I was referred here by Dr. Wesley, based in Winston-Salem/Wake Forest.
I met Dr. Wesley in June 2025.
also told the doctor that if I placed my finger beneath my left eye and pushed the eyeball upward, my vision improved. He attributed this to the cataract, suggesting there might be some swelling associated with it. But then, where did the gas bubbles come from? That whole situation regarding the gas bubbles was truly wrong.
It appears that the failure to pay proper attention to this matter might be a mistake on the part of the administration; however, the intention to transfer the cornea was clearly present in their minds. The plan to transfer the cornea remained unchanged.
This implies that the errors were deliberately orchestrated to divert my healthy cornea to someone else; they are truly at fault for removing my healthy cornea—despite its excellent quality—and replacing it with an inferior one from another donor. This constitutes a grave offense.
The government and the medical department are responsible for this injustice against me. It seems this wrongdoing occurred because I come from a different background and hold a different nationality; it appears my nationality is the reason for this violation
An ultrasound test was performed on the eye; in fact, it was done twice—once on April 7th and again on July 20th. The issue was that the doctors could not visualize the interior of the eye because the cornea was too opaque (cloudy). However, this did not mean the patient lacked vision.
The opacity was obstructing vision, and removing the cataract—whether the cloudiness was in the cornea or the cataract itself was dense—would have restored sight without damaging the cornea.
So, the question arises: why was a corneal transplant necessary?
The surgical orders specified removing only half of the cornea, yet during the procedure, the entire cornea was removed and replaced.
This is documented in the medical records.
June 2026 It looked like there was swelling in the eye, so I called ATM Health to book an appointment. I was told that no appointments were available nearby, so I had to select an appointment in the Steel Click area.
I received a doctor's appointment for the 21st September On that day, significant swelling was observed—more severe than had been seen before. The doctor examined the eye, administered various drops, and performed several tests and measurements. Subsequently, a surgery date was scheduled for July 24th. However, on July 22nd or 23rd, I received a call stating that the surgery could not be performed. Initially, the reason given was a lack of adequate equipment, but upon further inquiry, no specific reason was provided for the cancellation. I was then given a referral to the University hospital; I had requested a doctor at the location near the university, but the appointment was scheduled at the Forest University extension—whether this was a misunderstanding or an error, I do not know. That appointment was set for October, but I later received a call stating it could not go ahead because the scheduled day was a public holiday. Consequently, the appointment was rescheduled for March 2026—a delay of six months. This situation felt like harassment; it was truly an ordeal
After the surgery, I discovered that the person who performed it was not actually a qualified doctor; I had never met the doctor who performed the procedure before. This came as a shock, and it later emerged that a wrongful act had been committed.
I found out that the person was a student learning under the guidance of the main doctor. Initially, I had trusted that the lead doctor—Dr. Matthew—would perform the surgery. Martha (a lady who checks and measures the IOL) had told me about Dr. Matthew Giegengack, noting that he performed a vast number of operations—up to a thousand a year.
Based on his experience, I decided to go ahead with the surgery. However, on the day of the procedure, a different doctor was present. I had no idea that a stranger, a trainee, or a student would be performing the surgery; I was never informed of this. I was clearly deceived. Later, regarding the questions I raised, Dr. Matthew provided answers on August 17, 2026. Subsequently, Jordan Bell answered questions concerning the IOL and other issues on August 31, 2026. When I asked the doctor, who had performed my surgery, I was told that both of them had done it, though the specific role each played was not specified; there were two procedures involved: cataract surgery and a corneal transplant.
However, when I met Jordan Mackenzie Bell on August 3rd, there was a surprise in store for me: she stated that she (Jordan Bell) had performed the surgery from start to finish.
According to Matthew Giegengack, they had previously been informed on July 22nd about what course of action to take if the surgery turned out to be unsuccessful. There was no guarantee of success, so it was a challenge—one we accepted—believing an experienced doctor would perform the surgery. However, that is not what happened; we had expected Dr. Mathew—a highly experienced doctor—to operate, but after the surgery, Dr. Jordan Bell appeared. He visited the hospital room and delivered a completely unexpected surprise.
He stated that *he* (Jordan Bell) had performed the surgery—the entire procedure—which shocked me. I wondered how a student with no experience could have operated on me. During post-surgery visits, there were various promises made regarding my vision, but they kept making excuses. I was told I would see clearly after six weeks. However, when that time passed, I still couldn't see as I should have. On September 21st—the date of the follow-up appointment—they suggested a second corneal surgery, saying they would implant a "very good" cornea this time. This raised the question: was the initial cornea defective, or was it the surgeon's mistake?
They refuse to admit the error or reveal the truth, choosing instead to hide the facts. Back on August 31st, I had been told that upon my return, my vision would be fully restored... It might look clear, but that hasn't happened; regarding the earlier appointments, the doctor gave various assurances—suggesting procedures like an air bubble or perhaps a corneal transplant—and made different recommendations.
August 31,2026
According to the doctor, the gas bubbles have dried up—meaning they have dissipated—so there is no need to wait any longer for that. I have a follow-up appointment on September 21st; on that day, they want to assess my vision and see how well I can see. They also need to determine the next course of action regarding the damage caused to my eye. I am deeply worried because the outcome was poor, and I have lost my vision as a result; I do not know when it will return or how long it will take. They had intended to perform cataract surgery, but they are not explaining the reasons behind the current situation.
During the eye examination on March 3rd, the largest letter 'H' was visible—though somewhat indistinct—while the smaller characters appeared blurred. The vision was recorded as 20/300 based on the largest letter; consequently, the IOL (Intraocular Lens) power was calculated based on this baseline. If the cataract is removed, the vision might improve from the 20/300 level; the vision does not remain at the 300 level after the procedure. The doctor was unaware—or perhaps should have been aware—that the vision had shifted to 20/20 or 20/40; consequently, an incorrect lens was implanted. When asked about the specific lens used, the doctor seemed startled and—without proper verification—simply stated "800" (referring to the power), likely because it was early August and he hadn't given it much thought. However, at a follow-up appointment on August 7th, the doctor stated the vision was 20/300. This raises concerns about the accuracy of the information provided; one has to wonder about the situation one has found oneself in. Crucially, this information should have been disclosed to the patient *before* the surgery, yet it wasn't—resulting in an unpleasant surprise. The situation took another turn on September 17th; when asked about the vision outcome following the cataract surgery, the doctor claimed it was 20/20—a third, conflicting figure. There is a clear lack of consistent information. If they provided documentation, a person could understand what was actually happening. During consultations, a woman accompanies the doctor, standing with a laptop to record whatever the doctor says during the examination. On September 21st, he mentioned a figure—which was presumably updated—but then the doctor... It is alleged that they are concealing information and failing to discuss the necessity of further surgeries on the elbow, simply because they wish to act according to their own whims. This could amount to a serious offense; a patient is naturally reluctant to undergo repeated surgeries—which carry risks of harm—yet a plan is being devised to subject the patient to another procedure solely to generate revenue. This constitutes an illegal act, and the authorities should take strict action against such conduct. Is a human body merely a toy for a small child—something to be played with at will and then discarded? Certainly, that should not be the case.
I am Hemal shah follow all rules and regulation need to require before surgery and after surgery
Take medicine or eye drop Prednisolone sus 1% four (4) times day present
Moxifloxacin ophthalmic solution USP 0.5 % 2-time day until doctor stop on (8-3-2026)
Take a shower with sunglass and avoided face not using water above eye area or shower from neck to lower leg
Wear sunglasses and stay home in dark
Avoid heat and light and sun or (stay away) Negative part of surgery
7-30-2026
I got an anesthesia and when I wake up I got a lock my head
I heard Dr. Matthew giegengack said to other doctor when he was few feet away saying no..no…no… not cut whole
No idea what happened it's not show up in chart
I got a half corneal that needed to be removed before surgery and after surgery it showed the whole corneal removed.
Looks like I am guessing DR. Jordan Mackenzie Bell cut my whole corneal instead. I needed to do half when they were taken out from the donor body as half corneal.
Or DR. Jordan bell cut my whole pupil when not supposed to do. (something going weird and they are hiding) something going strange and the patient did not know about it!
08-31-2026 I told the doctor 1 feet away the eye exam tool. I can't see it and not even your face (they were shocked and I showed both doctors scary faces. Also report when my eyeball is moving but I can’t hold it long when moving left side, I can see 1 feet area clear with good vision but once I release the eyeball in normal everything is blurry. (it’s still a good corneal in my eyes) when it was all good corneal I got before surgery.
They stolen my good corneal and transfer to someone else body (4 surgery going in same time in same building or room)
8-3-2026 DR. Matthew said maybe I have to do another (yag) Lasik surgery and may need eye glasses. One student, a male doctor, was talking to another doctor about surgery if they do more surgery and make more money when they believe I do not understand English.
8-7-2026 multiple student doctors checked my eye dr. Matthew 3 minute Jorden bell 5 minute and other people I do not know name lady check my eyes 15 minute and I am tire need to stand up and 1 man doctor came and check few second
8-17-2026 nurse update wrong information eyes pressure right eyes was 16 and she up date 20 when left eyes pressure was 20 and she update 16 (mirror side) not understand
8-31-2026 doctor said you will see good when comeback on 9-21-2026 I said miracle will not happen my eyes is same as 7-31-2026
09-21-2026 doctor reported maybe they need to do another corneal transplant and are going to give you a very well corneal next time? It’s shocking me again
07-31-2026 after surgery next day appointment was on 10:20 and they call inside in “d” area and waiting for doctor until 11:00 and doctor show up we got room in 11 am, when I need to keep head up in sky and keep eyeball or seating on chair and keep look head on ceiling I did it until 3 day when it was recommended by doctor.
3-3-2026 appointment day my vision found 300 means 20/300 and it’s on the chart they install 20/300 lenses in eyes when it’s not supposed to be? Because bad vison causes hard cataract after cataract remove most people may be have vision 20/20 or 20/40 (multiple things happen here)
I cannot see the person next to me. Its blurry face means very very bad vision.
I request to NC medical Board to charge investigation and charge penalty and fix my eyes free surgery in feature
or I may have to do lawsuit to them
Name: Hemal shah
Sign:
