The Veteran's urine retention and incontinence symptoms between January 4, 2005 to April 2010 were caused by VA medical care providers opting for an ablation of the posterior urethral valve surgery instead of a transurethral resection of the prostate. The Board found that this decision was not due to willful misconduct and proximately caused by VA's failure to timely diagnose and properly treat the disease or injury.
The deciding factor: The medical evidence showed that the Veteran’s continued symptoms were likely due to the natural progression of his condition, but also noted a minor impact from non-compliance with prescribed catheterization instructions.
- Claimed conditions
- Urine retention, Residuals of ablation of posterior urethral valve surgery
- How they argued it
- Reopened with new and material evidence
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- 100%
- Decision date
- June 11, 2018
- Citation
- 18109909
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 18109909.
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.
- Denied
The Veteran's urine retention, residuals of ablation of the posterior urethral valve surgery, from January 4, 2005, to April 27, 2010, is rated at the maximum schedular rating (60%) and thus no higher rating can be assigned.
- Denied
The Board denied the appellant's claim for service connection for the cause of her husband's death, finding that there was no medical evidence linking his prostate hypertrophy to his military service.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the case due to the need for additional development, including obtaining SSA records and providing proper notice regarding secondary service connection.
- Granted
The Veteran's claim for service connection for PTSD was reopened due to the submission of new and material evidence. The appeal is granted as his PTSD is now considered service-connected.
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.