Search Decisions

Decision Text

AF | PDBR | CY2014 | PD-2014-01692
Original file (PD-2014-01692.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
PHYSICAL DISABILITY BOARD OF REVIEW

NAME: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX  CASE: PD-2014-01692
BRANCH OF SERVICE: Army  BOARD DATE: 20141023
SEPARATION DATE: 20021004


SUMMARY OF CASE: Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an Active Duty CPT/O-3 (74B/Chemical Defense Warfare Officer) medically separated for a left knee condition. The left knee condition could not be adequately rehabilitated to meet the physical requirements of his Military Occupational Specialty. His profile allowed for an alternate aerobic event to satisfy physical fitness standards. He was issued a permanent L3 profile and referred for a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB). The left knee condition, characterized as “traumatic osteoarthritis, osteochondritis dissecans (OCD) lesion over the lateral femoral condyle and tibial plateau, status post (s/p) anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction and s/p microfracture of the left femoral condyle” were forwarded to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) IAW AR 40-501. No other conditions were submitted by the MEB. The Informal PEB adjudicated “traumatic osteoarthritis left knee, with OCD lesions, lateral femoral condyle and tibial plateau, s/p ACL reconstruction and microfracture of left femoral condyle” as a single unfitting condition, rated 10%, with likely application of the VA Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). The CI made no appeals and was medically separated.


CI CONTENTION: “Please consider all known conditions.”


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 those conditions identified but not determined to be unfitting by the PEB when specifically requested by the CI. The rating for the unfitting left knee condition is addressed below; no additional conditions are within the DoDI 6040.44 defined purview of the Board. 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.


 RATING COMPARISON :

Service IPEB – Dated 20020619
 VA - (7 Mos. Pre-Separation)
Condition
 Code Rating Condition Code Rating Exam
Traumatic Osteoarthritis Left Knee, w/OCD Lesions, s/p ACL Reconstruction 5003 10% Arthritis, Left Knee 5260 10% 20020311
Other x 0 (Not in Scope)
 Other x 0
Rating: 10%
 Rating: 10%
Derived from VA Rating Decision (VA RD ) dated 200 20513 (most proximate to date of separation [ DOS ] ).
VARD 20050107 granted separate 10% rating for instability of the left knee ( 5257 ) effective the day after separation.


ANALYSIS SUMMARY: IAW DoDI 6040.44, the Board’s authority is limited to making recommendations on correcting disability determinations. The Board’s role is thus confined to the review of medical records and all evidence at hand to assess the fairness of PEB rating determinations, compared to VASRD standards, based on ratable severity at the time of separation.

Traumatic Osteoarthritis Left Knee. The goniometric range-of-motion (ROM) evaluations in evidence which the Board weighed in arriving at its rating recommendation, with documentation of additional ratable criteria, are summarized in the chart below.

Left Knee ROM
 (Degrees)
 Ortho
~ 9 Mo. Pre-Sep
(20020123)
 Ortho
~ 8 Mo. Pre-Sep
(20020206)
VA C&P
~ 7 Mo. Pre-Sep
(20020311)
MEB NARSUM
 ~ 5 Mo. Pre-Sep
(20020509)
Flexion (140 Normal)
 130 140 120 135
Extension (0 Normal)
 0 0 0 0
Comment
 1A Lachman with firm endpoint 1+ Lachman with good endpoint Pain at end range of motion 1+ Lachman with definite end point
§4. 71a R ating
 10% 10% 10% 10%

The CI underwent arthroscopic surgery of the left knee on 14 May 2001 for repair of a torn ACL, partial removal of the lateral and medial menisci (for tears) and microfracture of the lateral femoral condyle (thigh bone portion of the knee joint) for loss of joint surface cartilage (degenerative process due to osteochondritis dessicans). An orthopedic examination performed on 23 January 2002, noted a complaint of instability and pain with use. On examination, the Lachman test for ACL instability was graded as 1A indicating mild movement but with a firm endpoint indicating an intact ACL graft. The knee was stable to lateral stress (valgus and varus) and ROM was mildly reduced in flexion (noted in chart). Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the left knee on 30 January 2002 demonstrated the ACL graft was intact (as well as the other ligaments) and degenerative changes. At the time of a follow-up orthopedic examination on 6 February 2002, there was pain with walking and running. On examination, the ROM was normal. The Lachman was 1+ with a good endpoint (consistent with intact ACL graft) and a stable anterior and posterior drawer maneuvers (also indicating absence of instability).

The VA Compensation and Pension (C&P) examination on 11 March 2002, recorded the CI’s history of pain, weakness and requiring a brace to stand and walk. The ROM observed at the C&P examination is recorded on the chart above and described the functional limitation caused by the knee condition as slight. No examination tests for ligamentous instability were recorded. X-rays demonstrated degenerative changes. The MEB orthopedic narrative summary performed on 9 May 2002, reported persistent left knee pain with use. The CI was able to function in Garrison but was not able to function in the field, run, jump or ruck march due to pain. On examination, there was slight limitation of flexion (recorded in the chart), with crepitus (grinding sensation) noted by the examiner. The lateral femoral condyle of the left knee was tender. The Lachman test showed mild laxity with a definite end point (indicating an intact ACL graft). The anterior drawer was negative for ACL instability and tests of all other ligaments were normal. A subsequent VA C&P examination in November 2003 (a year after separation) recorded absence of knee ligament instability on examination, with a negative anterior drawer and negative Lachman test. At the July 2004 C&P examination (21 months after separation), the CI complained of occasional feeling of knee instability after sitting or standing for 20 minutes but the examination reported absence of instability.

The Board directs attention to its rating recommendation based on the above evidence. The PEB rated the left knee traumatic arthritis (with osteochondritis dessicans lesions and s/p ACL reconstruction and femoral condyle microfracture) at 10%, using code 5003 (degenerative arthritis). The VA rated left knee arthritis 10% (analogously to code 5260, limitation of flexion) citing functional impairment with use. The VARD performed on 7 January 2005 granted an additional 10% rating for instability of the left knee (5257) based on the July 2004 VA C&P examination recording subjective symptoms of instability after standing or sitting. The ROM examinations proximate to separation did not show limitation of motion of the left knee that attained a minimum rating under VA diagnostic codes for limitation of flexion or limitation of extension (5260, 5261). There was evidence of functional loss (§4.40) to support the 10% rating adjudicated by the PEB and the initial VARD. The CI was s/p partial removal of meniscus (semi-lunar cartilage) supporting a 10% rating under the code for symptomatic s/p removal of semilunar cartilage (5259) but this provides no rating benefit to the CI attained by consideration of §4.59 (painful motion) and §4.40 (functional loss). There was no dislocated meniscus with locking to support rating consideration under VASRD diagnostic code 5258. The Board next considered whether an additional separate rating for instability (5257) was supported in addition to the 10% rating for functional loss (§4.40)/painful motion (§4.59) as described above. Although there was mild left knee ACL laxity (1+) after the surgery, the ligament graft was intact by MRI and by examination based on a firm end point on examination. The VA C&P examinations following separation also did not document objective examination findings of instability. Therefore the Board concluded there was not sufficient evidence for consideration of a rating under diagnostic code 5257 (other impairment, instability). After due deliberation, considering all of the evidence and mindful of VASRD §4.3 (reasonable doubt), the Board concluded there was insufficient cause to recommend a change in the PEB adjudication for the left knee 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 left knee pain condition and IAW VASRD §4.71a, 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 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 20140414, w/atchs
Exhibit B. Service Treatment Record
Exhibit C. Department of Veterans’ Affairs Treatment Record









                          
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
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 XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX , AR20150007691 (PD201401692)

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

Similar Decisions

  • AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00583

    Original file (PD2009-00583.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    The MEB found in view of the “osteoarthritis degeneration of the left knee joint” as interfering with duty and forwarded “Bicompartmental Osteoarthritis of the Left Knee, Failed ACL (Anterior Cruciate Ligament) Reconstruction in the Left Knee and Accompanying Anterolateral Rotatory Instability” to the Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) on the NAVMED 6100/1. Based on the examination results, the examiner opined that the CI had Bicompartmental osteoarthritis of the left knee secondary to the ACL...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02698

    Original file (PD-2013-02698.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    No other conditionwas submitted by the MEB.The Informal PEB adjudicated “left knee pain due to degenerative joint disease [DJD]” and “right ankle pain due to degenerative joint disease”as unfitting, rated 10% and 10%, citing application of the DODI and Veterans Affairs Schedule for Rating Disabilities (VASRD). Post-Separation) ConditionCodeRatingConditionCodeRatingExam Left Knee Pain due to DJD5009-500310%Left Knee Residuals, S/P ACL … 5003-526010%20090831Right Ankle Pain due to...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00389

    Original file (PD2011-00389.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    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. The multiply-operated left knee with anteromedial knee pain, subjective instability and mechanical symptoms condition, analogously coded 5299-5003, per VASRD direction, would warrant a 10% rating as given by the PEB and the VA. With non-compensable ROM...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2009 | PD2009-00094

    Original file (PD2009-00094.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    If used, it would most likely be at the "Moderate" knee disability 20% level considering the totality of CI's knee exam and post-separation VA exam which demonstrated no worsening of CI's knee condition. In the matter of the Right Knee condition, the Board unanimously recommends separately coding the instability and painful motion of the CI's right knee with a rating of Chronic right knee instability s/p trauma, 5010-5257 at 20% and Right knee pain limited motion s/p trauma, 5010-5260 at...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 01599

    Original file (PD2012 01599.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    Left Knee Condition . Therefore the Board conclude there not sufficient evidence for consideration of a rating under diagnostic code 5257 (other impairment, instability). SUBJECT: Department of Defense Physical Disability Board of Review Recommendation for AR20130018487 (PD201201599)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.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00737

    Original file (PD2011-00737.docx) Auto-classification: Approved

    SUMMARY OF CASE : Data extracted from the available evidence of record reflects that this covered individual (CI) was an active duty SGT/E-5 (67U20/CH-47 Helicopter Repairman) medically separated for a right knee condition. Right Knee Condition . In the matter of the right knee condition, the Board unanimously recommends a dual coding disability rating for a combined rating of 30%, IAW VASRD §4.71a.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-00504

    Original file (PD2011-00504.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    I was rated on one knee condition at 10%. Both knees R and L have laxity was not rated on both conditions. In the matter of the right and left knee condition (anterior patellofemoral pain), the Board unanimously recommends a separate disability rating of 10% for each knee, coded 5299-5260 IAW VASRD §4.71a.

  • AF | PDBR | CY2012 | PD2012 00229

    Original file (PD2012 00229.rtf) Auto-classification: Denied

    The single voter for dissent (who recommended a separate left knee 20% and right knee 10% rating)submitted the appended minority opinion.In the matter of the contended asthma, LBP and OSA conditions, the Board unanimously recommends no change from the determinations as not unfitting.There were no other conditions within the Board’s scope of review for consideration. The AO therefore recommends that each joint be separately rated as follows: an unfitting left knee condition coded 5010-5258...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2013 | PD-2013-02796

    Original file (PD-2013-02796.rtf) Auto-classification: Approved

    The physical examination noted normal ROM of the left knee, presence of a scar, and a general comment of “Stable.”The final diagnosis was reported as,“Left knee tibial plateau fracture with ligament injury.”At the MEB NARSUM exam on 6 February 2007, the CI was still using crutches in accordance with the post-operative recovery plan for 8 to 12 weeks of limited weight bearing. Although the ACL and PCL were intact, there was evidence of residual laxity at the time of the PT examination and...

  • AF | PDBR | CY2011 | PD2011-01029

    Original file (PD2011-01029.docx) Auto-classification: Denied

    Although the PEB adjudicated “bilateral knee” as the unfitting condition, the record of proceedings reflects separate codes and ratings for each knee, with application of the bilateral factor in computing the combined rating, which is consistent with VASRD standards. No other conditions were service-connected with a compensable rating by the VA within 12 months of separation or contended by the CI. Exhibit C. Department of Veterans Affairs Treatment Record