Radiculopathy & sciatica Board decisions

The Board has determined that there have been issues with obtaining the Veteran's service treatment records and these must be obtained again. The appeal is being remanded to ensure all necessary efforts are made to secure these records.

The Veteran's claims for service connection for chronic fatigue syndrome, a low back disability, bilateral lower extremity radiculopathy, and hemorrhoids were denied effective January 29, 2016.,Eligibility to Dependents' Educational Assistance (DEA) under 38 U.S.C. Chapter 35 was also denied effective January 29, 2016.

The Veteran's low back pain syndrome with minimal degenerative joint disease of lumbar spine is currently rated at 20 percent, and the Board finds that it more nearly approximates favorable ankylosis of the entire thoracolumbar spine. The Veteran’s left lower extremity radiculopathy prior to December 27, 2018, results in no more than mild incomplete paralysis of the sciatic nerve, while from December 27, 2018, it results in no more than moderate incomplete paralysis.,The Veteran's TDIU claim is remanded as there are issues with his service-connected disabilities.

The Veteran's low back disability and right leg radiculopathy have been granted a 40 percent rating, effective from the date of the decision.

The Board has granted service connection for major depressive disorder, but the claims for lumbar spine degenerative joint disease and degenerative disc disease as well as left lower extremity radiculopathy of the sciatic nerve are remanded due to insufficient evidence.

The Veteran's claim for an increased disability rating for lumbar spine degenerative disc disease status post fusion with mild bilateral sciatic radiculopathy is remanded due to the inadequacy of a September 2018 VA examination report. A new examination must be conducted and a retrospective medical opinion provided.

Service connection is granted for a lumbar spine disability, left lower extremity radiculopathy (secondary to service-connected lumbar spine disability), and dizziness. The case is remanded for further examination regarding the etiology of the Veteran's dizziness.

The Board has granted service connection for asbestosis and OSA secondary to PTSD. The remaining issues of service connection are remanded due to incomplete records and the need for additional examinations.

The Veteran's appeal for service connection for an acquired psychiatric disorder is dismissed. The Board also remanded the issues of a higher rating for right lower extremity radiculopathy and a compensable rating for surgical scar of the lumbar spine.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities do not meet the criteria for a TDIU rating based on their combined rating of 80%. However, due to the lack of an examination considering her unemployability due to these conditions, the case is being remanded for further evaluation.

The Veteran's initial claim for higher ratings for left and right lower extremity radiculopathy was denied.,For the period prior to November 23, 2015, an initial evaluation in excess of 10 percent for right lower extremity radiculopathy was denied. Since November 23, 2015, an initial evaluation in excess of 20 percent for right lower extremity radiculopathy was also denied.,A TDIU rating was granted.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities, including PTSD, cervical spine issues, fibromyalgia, and others, prevent him from obtaining and maintaining substantially gainful employment.

The Veteran's service-connected intervertebral disc syndrome with right sciatic nerve involvement and lumbar degenerative arthritis is being remanded for an updated VA examination to determine the current severity of his disability.

The Board has granted service connection for radiculopathy of the right lower extremity and increased the Veteran's rating for complicated syncope versus seizure disorder to 100 percent effective July 11, 2017. The Veteran's claims for gynecological conditions (dysmenorrhea and candidiasis) and a bladder condition are remanded.

The Board has remanded the claims for service connection and increased ratings due to insufficient evidence, but the Veteran did not attend the scheduled VA examinations.

The Board finds that remand is required for addendum opinions addressing the Veteran’s claims of service connection for a neck disorder and left upper extremity radiculopathy, as these issues are inextricably intertwined with his claim for service connection for a cervical spine disorder. The Veteran asserts that both conditions are related to his active duty service.

The Board has remanded four issues related to service connection for various disabilities, including a lumbar spine disability, sciatica of the right lower extremity, left foot disability, and loss of vision of the left eye. The AOJ is instructed to obtain relevant medical records and schedule the Veteran for VA examinations to determine the nature and etiology of these conditions.

The Board has remanded several issues related to the Veteran's service connection claims, including tinnitus, headaches, heart disability, hypertension, lumbar spine disability, bilateral flatfoot and plantar fasciitis, and residuals of a left ankle injury. The issues have been remanded due to outstanding VA and private treatment records that need to be obtained.

The Veteran's claim for a rating in excess of 10 percent for right lower extremity radiculopathy prior to December 18, 2009 was denied. The Board found that the evidence did not support a finding of moderate incomplete paralysis and thus only granted a 10 percent rating. For the TDIU claim, the Veteran's combined disability rating was insufficient to meet the criteria for a TDIU rating as his disabilities were associated with his service-connected lumbar spine condition.

The Board denied service connection for heart palpitations, sciatica (pain/numbness from lower back to all the way down to the leg/foot/toe), and PTSD.,There is no current evidence of a heart disability or sciatica related to active duty service. The Veteran's statements regarding these conditions are not considered competent evidence.