The Board found that the veteran's pericardiocentesis procedure, which resulted in a pericardial effusion and subsequent complications, was not caused by his willful misconduct. The additional disability of pericarditis is considered to be secondary to the VA care provided during the December 2001 treatment.
The deciding factor: The Board determined that the veteran's pericardiocentesis procedure resulted in an unexpected complication (pericardial effusion) and subsequent complications, which were not reasonably foreseeable by a reasonable health care provider. The event was caused by VA's failure to exercise the degree of care expected from a reasonable health care provider.
- Claimed conditions
- Pericarditis, Atrial Fibrillation
- How they argued it
- Not specified
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- July 13, 2007
- Citation
- 0721214
This is a plain-language summary generated by AI from a public Board of Veterans’ Appeals decision. It can contain errors — always verify against the original. Look up the original decision on VA.gov (opens in a new tab) using citation 0721214.
What this means for you
A grant means the Board agreed the veteran was entitled to the benefit. Decisions like this show the kind of evidence and arguments that tend to succeed for claims like it.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Granted
Service connection for OSA is granted, and the Veteran's initial ratings for atrial fibrillation, right upper extremity peripheral neuropathy, left upper extremity peripheral neuropathy, right lower extremity peripheral neuropathy, left lower extremity peripheral neuropathy, right upper extremity neuralgia, and left upper extremity neuralgia are all granted at 10 percent.
- Dismissed
The Veteran's appeals for increased rating, service connection, and TDIU have been dismissed due to his withdrawal of all claims prior to the promulgation of a decision.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for Congestive Heart Failure with Atrial Fibrillation with AICD and Hypertension (High Blood Pressure), finding that there was no evidence of direct service connection, and that the conditions were not caused or aggravated by service-connected OSA.
- Denied
The Board denied the Veteran's claim for SMC in excess of SMC(n) based on his service-connected conditions and additional disabilities, as well as his need for aid and attendance. The appeal was dismissed.
Free starter guide for your own claim
Reading this because you were denied or under-rated? Get the plain-English next steps — your appeal options, the deadline that protects you, and how appeals like yours turn out. One email, no spam.
We will only use this to send the guide. No spam, unsubscribe any time. We never sell your information.
We are not the VA. Veterans’ Rights is an independent resource built for veterans. We are not the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, not part of the government, and not endorsed by any government agency.
This is general information, not legal advice. For advice about your own situation, talk to a VA-accredited representative — many help for free.