Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-01058
Original file (PD-2013-01058.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXX     CASE: PD-2013-01058
BRANCH OF SERVICE: Army  BOARD DATE: 20150217
SEPARATION DATE: 20051001


SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty 1LT (Health Services) medically separated for deep vein thrombosis (DVT). The DVT could not be adequately rehabilitated to meet the physical requirements of her Military Occupational Specialty or satisfy physical fitness standards. She was issued a permanent P3 profile and referred for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). The DVT condition, characterized as “recurrent left lower extremity DVT,” was forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501. No other conditions were submitted by the MEB. The Informal PEB (IPEB) adjudicated “deep vein thrombosis, left lower extremity with pulmonary embolism (resolved)” as unfitting, rated 20%. The CI waived her right to a Formal PEB, but submitted a written appeal. The IPEB decision was upheld and the CI was medically separated.


CI CONTENTION: “Unfit rating was given for underlying effect of not the cause. I was diagnosed with antiphospholipid antibodies (APLAs) which cause my blood to clot resulting in lifelong anticoagulation therapy. In addition, approximately 7 months after separation, I was diagnosed with Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma found to be service connected by the VA. My medical records from the Army will show biopsy of lymph nodes.”

His complete submission is at Exhibit A.


SCOPE OF REVIEW: The Board’s scope of review is defined in DoDI 6040.44, Enclosure 3, paragraph 5.e. (2). It is limited to those conditions determined by the PEB to be unfitting for continued military service and when specifically requested by the CI, those conditions identified by the PEB, but determined to be not unfitting. Any conditions outside the Board’s defined scope of review and any contention not requested in this application may remain eligible for future consideration by the Board for Correction of Military/Naval Records. Furthermore, the Board’s authority is limited to assessing the fairness and accuracy of PEB rating determinations and recommending corrections, where appropriate. The Board’s assessment of the PEB rating determinations is confined to review of medical records and all available evidence for application of the Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD) standards to the unfitting medical condition at the time of separation. The Board has neither the role nor the authority to compensate for post-separation progression or complications of service-connected conditions. That role and authority is granted by Congress to the Department of Veterans Affairs, operating under a different set of laws. The Board gives consideration to VA evidence, particularly within 12 months of separation, but only to the extent that it reasonably reflects the severity of the disability at the time of separation.





RATING COMPARISON :

Service IPEB – Dated 20050623
 VA - (~2 Mos. Post-Separation)
Condition
 Code Rating Condition Code Rating Exam
Deep Vein Thrombosis 7121 20% Recurrent DVT, Left Lower Extremity with Spider Veins 7199-7121 0%* 20051118
Other x 0 (Not in Scope)
 Other x 2
Rating: 20%
 Rating: 0%
Derived from VA Rating Decision (VA RD ) dated 200 60215 ( most proximate to date of separation [ DOS ] ).
* VARD 20061024 increased rating to 10% effective 20051002 (day after DOS)
ANALYSIS SUMMARY:

Deep Vein Thrombosis Condition. The narrative summary (NARSUM), dated 5 months prior to separation, noted that the CI had two distinct episodes of pulmonary emboli (blood clots to the lungs) with complete resolution of symptoms and without pulmonary or cardiac disease. This was followed by recurrent (and chronic) DVT of the left lower extremity (LLE) confirmed by imaging. These episodes were associated with pain and swelling of the LLE with marked but incomplete improvement between episodes. The NARSUM exam stated that the LLE was 1 inch larger in diameter than the right due to swelling but the overlying skin appeared normal. Lab testing indicated that the CI was positive for the Lupus Anticoagulant antibody (associated with thrombosis but is not considered hereditary). At the MEB examination performed 4 months prior to separation; the CI stated she had “recurrent pain and leg swelling, left extremity one inch larger than [the] right, varicose veins…” The provider stated that the CI was “currently stable and asymptomatic” with “normal” marked under skin and lymphatics, with no comments regarding varicose veins, eczema, ulceration or pigmentation of the extremity. Per the commander’s statement, the CI underwent 1 day of hospitalization and 3 days of physician prescribed quarters for her leg thrombosis.

At the VA Compensation and Pension exam performed a month after separation, the CI denied chest pain or shortness of breath. The examiner noted that the CI had a normal lung and cardiac exam and the CI was walking without limp or assistive device. There was no lower extremity edema and DVT symptom testing (Homan’s) was negative bilaterally. Skin exam did not show any non-healing ulcers, or eczematous patches. There were “faint, slight, only spider veins… with no varicose veins.” The CI was using a support stocking. No measurements of the extremity were performed.

The Board directed attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence. Under an analogous code 7121 (post-phlebitic syndrome of any etiology), the PEB assigned a 20% rating for persistent edema, incompletely relieved by elevation of [the] extremity, with or without [skin changes]. There was no prior history of vascular problems to support this condition as having existed prior to service. The VA’s initial 0% rating was increased to 10% within the year based on reasonable doubt. Board members agreed that there was no evidence supporting a compensable rating under code 6817 (Pulmonary Vascular Disease - Chronic Pulmonary Thromboembolism) as there was no evidence of lung or cardiac dysfunction. After due deliberation, considering all of the evidence and mindful of VASRD §4.3 (reasonable doubt), the Board concluded that there was insufficient cause to recommend a change in the PEB adjudication for the DVT condition.


BOARD FINDINGS: IAW DoDI 6040.44, provisions of DoD or Military Department regulations or guidelines relied upon by the PEB will not be considered by the Board to the extent they were inconsistent with the VASRD in effect at the time of the adjudication. The Board did not surmise from the record or PEB ruling in this case that any prerogatives outside the VASRD were exercised. In the matter of the DVT condition and IAW VASRD §4.104, the Board unanimously recommends no change in the PEB adjudication. There were no other conditions within the Board’s scope of review for consideration.


RECOMMENDATION: The Board, therefore, recommends that there be no re-characterization of the CI’s disability and separation determination.



The following documentary evidence was considered:

Exhibit A. DD Form 294, dated 20130723, w/atchs
Exhibit B. Service Treatment Record
Exhibit C. Department of Veterans’ Affairs Treatment Record
Exhibit D. Air Force Consultant Communication, dated 20130123





XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
President
DoD Physical Disability Board of Review


 SAMR-RB                                                                         


MEMORANDUM FOR Commander, US Army Physical Disability Agency
(AHRC-DO), 2900 Crystal Drive, Suite 300, Arlington, VA 22202-3557


 SUBJECT: Department of Defense Physical Disability Board of Review Recommendation for XXXXXXXXXXXXXX, AR20150007425 (PD201301058)

I have reviewed the enclosed Department of Defense Physical Disability Board of Review (DoD PDBR) recommendation and record of proceedings pertaining to the subject individual. Under the authority of Title 10, United States Code, section 1554a, I accept the Board’s recommendation and hereby deny the individual’s application.
This decision is final. The individual concerned, counsel (if any), and any Members of Congress who have shown interest in this application have been notified of this decision by mail.

BY ORDER OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY:




Encl                                                  XXXXXXXXXXXXXX
                                                      Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Army
                                                      (Review Boards)
                                                     
CF:
( ) DoD PDBR
( ) DVA

Similar Decisions

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD 2014 02890

    Original file (PD 2014 02890.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    SEPARATION DATE: 20070705 Post-Separation)ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Coagulopathy, Protein C Deficiency, with History of Deep Vein Thrombosis7199-71210%Thrombophlebitis of Popliteal Vein, Left Leg7121NSC*20070223Other x 0 (Not in Scope) Combined: 40%Rated: 0%Derived from VA Rating Decision (VARD)dated 20070802. RECOMMENDATION : The Board, therefore, recommends that there be no re-characterization of the CI’s disability and separation determination.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00559

    Original file (PD2009-00559.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    There were no trophic skin changes or evidence of stasis dermatitis.” Diagnosis was “Postphlebitic syndrome, left lower extremity.” The VA (near entry into TDRL) used essentially the same exams and history as the military and rated the CI’s DVT-related conditions as 7121 (Left Lower Extremity Deep Venous Thrombosis) at 10%, and 6817 (Bilateral Base Pulmonary Emboli Secondary to Deep Venous Thrombosis) at 60%. After due deliberation, considering all of the evidence and mindful of VASRD §4.3...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD2013 00864

    Original file (PD2013 00864.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    SUMMARY OF CASE : Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty SSGT/E-6 (3381/Food Service Specialist) medically separated for recurrent deep venous thrombosis (DVT).The CI reportedly had his first episode of DVT (a clot in a large leg vein), left lower extremity (LLE), in 1985. The Board determined that the DVT in either leg, in the presence of the requirement for lifelong anti-coagulation, was separately unfitting and...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-01176

    Original file (PD-2014-01176.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    Repeat examination on 27 June 2004 also recorded that there was no edema of the lower extremities. On examination, the left calf and both thighs were tender to touch, and several distended veins were felt on the left lower calf and right upper thigh.A Coumadin Clinic encounter on 9 December 2005, recorded the CI experienced muscle pain when he overdid activities such as standing too long or playing basketball. The CI complained of edema of the lower extremities relieved with elevation on...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00663

    Original file (PD2011-00663.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    Although the pulmonary scans and pulmonary hypertension were improving, the CI had continued shortness of breath and had a diagnosis of chronic thromboembolic disease. The Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) adjudicated primary hypercoagulable state, on lifelong anticoagulation condition as unfitting (with contributing category II chronic thromboembolic disease and venous stasis) and the CI was rated at 40% and placed on the Temporary Disability Retired List (TDRL). Exhibit C. Department of...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-02239

    Original file (PD-2014-02239.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The initial VA C&P examination (within the DES Pilot process occurred)dated3 June 2009, during the examination, the examiner noted that the CI was not currently in psychiatric treatment and during brief treatment for his MH symptoms in 2008 he was not hospitalized, was not suicidal and had not required any psychotropic medications.At the VA C&P examination the CI denied being anxious or depressedand the examiner noted the CI was “without signs of ongoing anxiety, depression, or psychosis at...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00869

    Original file (PD2011-00869.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The PEB adjudicated the DVT condition as unfitting, stating, “this disability existed prior to mobilization and was not permanently aggravated by service, but is compensable in accordance with 10 USC 1207a (eight year rule).” It was rated 20%, citing criteria of the Veterans Administration Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). SCOPE OF REVIEW : The Board wishes to clarify that the scope of its review as defined in Department of Defense Instruction (DoDI) 6040.44 (Enclosure 3, paragraph...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD2013 00114

    Original file (PD2013 00114.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Any conditions or contention not requested in this application, or otherwise outside the Board’s defined scope of review, remain eligible for future consideration by the Board for Correction of Military Records (BCMR). The service treatment record documented no thrombosis problems following the start of anticoagulant therapy in July 2001 through the MEB exam; and the MEB and C&P examiners reported no objective findings related to abnormal clotting or bleeding, or of any daily functional...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01365

    Original file (PD2012 01365.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Subsequently after two TDRL periodic exams, the PEB determined the CI’s left lower leg DVT to be stable and unfitting and at this time also determined the CI’s condition to be “post phlebitic syndrome” rated 10%. CI CONTENTION : “Per the findings of my Physical Evaluation Board Proceeding dated 17 Nov 2002, my combined disability rating was rated at 40% category I unfitting conditions. Both the PEBand the VA used the same code:7121, with the PEB rating the condition 10%and the VA rating it...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00660

    Original file (PD2011-00660.docx) Auto-classification: Approved

    The Board evaluates DVA evidence proximal to separation in arriving at its recommendations, but its authority resides in evaluating the fairness of DES fitness decisions and rating determinations for disability at the time of separation. At the VA Compensation and Pension (C&P) exam (nine months after separation), the physician noted intermittent symptoms of pain and edema in the LLE; although, DVT symptoms were not active at that time. In the matter of the hypercoaguability condition, the...