Citation Nr: 21039948
Decision Date: 07/01/21	Archive Date: 07/01/21

DOCKET NO. 17-36 168A
DATE: July 1, 2021

REMANDED

Service connection for a kidney disorder is remanded.

REASONS FOR REMAND

The Veteran served on active duty from November 1979 to November 1983.

In October 2019, the Veteran testified before the undersigned Veterans' Law Judge. A copy of the transcript is associated with the record.

Kidney Disorder

The Board remanded this matter in December 2020 for a VA examination which addressed the Veteran's claim that his in-service Motrin use contributed to his kidney disease. A VA examination was conducted in February 2021. In a June 2021 written brief, the Veteran's representative argued that the VA examination was inadequate as the examiner did not address medical journal articles which discuss a possible link between Motrin use and the development kidney disease. The Board agrees. As such, the Board finds that the 2021 VA examination is inadequate, and a new examination is warranted. 

(Continued on the next page)

 

The matter is REMANDED for the following action:

Obtain a VA examination opinion from a nephrologist (M.D.), if possible, regarding the etiology of the Veteran's kidney disability. If a nephrologist is not available to provide such an opinion, obtain an opinion from a physician (M.D.). Should the examiner require an in-person examination, one should be scheduled accordingly. The examiner must review the claims file and provide a response to the following:

Is any current kidney disability at least as likely as not related to service, including Motrin prescribed during service in December 1979, March 1980, July 1980, and October 1982?

The examiner should consider a September 2014 VA record indicating chronic kidney disease was thought to be from diabetes and hypertension, a June 2016 record showing a high QMIALB test result indicating kidney damage due to diabetes, and September 2019 medical treatise evidence linking NSAID use to progressive kidney damage. The examiner is asked to specifically review and address the information identified and linked in the representative's written brief dated June 17, 2021,  including a peer-reviewed study published in Pharmaceuticals, an advisory from the Centers for Disease Control, and an advisory from the National Kidney Foundation.

(Continued on the next page)

 

Provide a rationale to support the opinion(s).

 

 

JOHN Z. JONES

Veterans Law Judge

Board of Veterans' Appeals

Attorney for the Board	A. Parrish, Counsel

The Board's decision in this case is binding only with respect to the instant matter decided. This decision is not precedential and does not establish VA policies or interpretations of general applicability. 38 C.F.R. § 20.1303.