The Board has remanded the case due to the need for a medical opinion regarding the timing of the sternal wound infection and subsequent sternectomy, as well as the Veteran's assertions about prior treatment. The claims related to compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 are being addressed.
The deciding factor: The Board found that additional medical opinions were needed to address specific issues regarding the timing of diagnosis and treatment for the sternal wound infection, which may have contributed to the need for a sternectomy.
- Claimed conditions
- sternectomy, sternal wound infection
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- March 7, 2022
- Citation
- 22012832
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 22012832.
What this means for you
A remand is not a loss. The Board sent the case back for more development — often a new exam or missing records — before making a final decision. Many remands later end in a grant, and the decision spells out exactly what the Board wanted to see.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has decided to remand the case due to the need for additional development, including obtaining private treatment records from Osceola Regional Medical Center. The focus is on determining if the Veteran was exposed to tactical herbicide agents at Don Muang RTAFB during his service as a fire prevention specialist.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has remanded the claims for compensation under 38 U.S.C. § 1151 due to a lack of compliance with directives in an April 2015 Board remand.
- Granted
The Veteran's sternal wound infection and removal of the sternum and attached chest muscles are considered a result of his CABG and mitral valve replacement performed at a VA Medical Center in January 2006, which was not reasonably foreseeable. The Board has determined that the criteria for compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 have been met.
- Denied
The Board denied the veteran's claims for increased ratings for his service-connected lumbar myositis, psychoneurosis and conversion hysteria, residuals of shrapnel wounds of the left thigh and pelvis with retained foreign bodies and scars, and residuals of shell fragment wounds of the right thigh and left leg. The veteran was also denied entitlement to a total disability rating based on individual unemployability due to service-connected disabilities.
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.