C-File Not Complete

[63SIERRA]

I requested a copy of my c-file several months after rating for kidney removal due to kidney cancer . there was nothing in my c-file at all abt my kidney surgery. why would this be ? the files were in my med recs at the local vamc, which I have copies of.

[Philip Rogers]

Sorry but no you're not worth it, to the VA. They can medicate you and keep you quiet, thus saving them mucho money. They never promised great care, just "free care," which is why I use my private physician. In the past 4 months, he's put me on insulin, scanned my bladder, my aorta, increased my meds for my blood pressure and I've had an EKG. I also have a referral to a pulmonologist in 2 wks. The VA has done basically nothing.

I did have an eye exam, by a student the other day, that I had to sit thru a second time, while the Dr reviewed it and checked everything. That's the problem w/VA care. If they err, you can sue, if you live. jmo

pr

[free_spirit_etc]

"FREE as far as your question abt what they referenced in my descision, they didnt even mention the cancer, they just said 30 percent for removal of kidney,.. period,"

I was specifically asking about the evidence they listed. Did they list the surgery reports, and other documentation involved, as evidence they used on that decision? If so, they might have accessed the records digitally and not printed them for the paper C-file.

Have you asked for a copy of your digital records?

[63SIERRA]

I understand, your talking abt the seperate section where they list generic sources like vamc treatment records, service med recs ect.

that is not specific and pretty much all inclusive. If they say veterans VAMC treatment records. that doesnt tell me a whole lot abt what specific documents they used, to make a descision. If they used the document,s they should have filed the ones they used, as the tools they used to decide. Just sending me a hodgepodge of random records, with no ryme or reason that is not pertinent to my descision is useless. THEY KNOW WHAT IM AFTER.

I only asked for a COMPLETE copy ofmy c-file, ,. I would have thought that would cover my request. The fact that the va has records seperated in paper and digital formats, is not my potato , If they had to ship them to me on stone tablets carved with a chisel I dont care. I just wanted them all . ha

If I go ask an accountant of a complete accounting of the years transactions, I think they would know what I want. not what they have in the file cabinet, minus what they have on thier computer.

Edited November 10, 2013 by 63SIERRA

[63SIERRA]

This paper file, digital file scam is going to haunt veterans for a long time, because they will always be able to play the shell game with you, do you want the paper or digital. ,,, hm m I dont know, whats in the digital? well digital is what was once in the paper.. hmmm whats in the paper, ,., hmmm I dont know, because now they are digital . gimme a damn break.

[free_spirit_etc]

To ___

I requested a complete copy of my C-file on ___. However, when I received it, I noticed some records are missing. I am specifically referring to records involving my kidney cancer and subsequent surgery. I am assuming these were in my C-file at one point because I was granted a 30% rating for the removal of my kidney on ____. I would like to receive a copy of ALL of the records (both paper and digital) that were used in making the decisions on my claims.

[free_spirit_etc]

It was too much of a surprize to the doctors when it was incidentally found on ultrasound, when they called they didnt say. Sir the cyst that has been growing on your kidney seems to have gotten larger, and looks cancerous, come in so we can take a better look at it on ultrasound. and keep in mind, we are talking CENTIMETERS here, not milimeters. thats almost as large as the kidney itself. I dont think its just everyday, routine to find a 5 centimeter cycst on a human vital organ,

From what I have read, renal cysts are fairly common. It seems that what they noticed on the 2011 scan caused them concern, while what they found on the 2003 scan did not.

who they already knew had a disease that makde kidney cancer likely, to just dismiss the finding. I am not sure you have a standing here because the studies that linked kidney cancer to hepatitis C are fairly recent. So you can’t go back and say that the VA doctors should have known you were at high risk for kidney cancer in 2003 because a 2010 study found a connection. An attorney will have to tell me different .. Im abt tired of farting around with these goons, as soon as I get my descision on my refiled claims, Im going to consult with an attorney,

I think seeing an attorney might be a good idea. You also might want to ask a doctor about the matter.

And the fact that they never told me abt this large cyst, that may have been cancerous at the time, because they never biopsyed it, makes me even more suspect that someone dropped the ball.

They might not have had to need to biopsy it at the time. They would have only needed to biopsy it if they suspected it to be cancerous. I agree they should have told you about the cyst though, regardless.

look at the big picture, how did it progress from a 5 centimeter cysts that they evidenty thought was cancer free, to a 7 mm,x 6mmx 5 mm cancerous growth, that also consumed my adrenal gland, and some of my adrenal vein , if they were tracking it.?

5 cm = 2 inches 7 cm = 2.8 inches. 2003 – 2011 = 8 years. As most things I have read say there is little reason to treat renal cysts unless they are producing symptoms, and that renal cysts rarely turn cancerous, you will have to show that they were negligent in their “standard of care” to not monitor it, that they would have found the cancer sooner if they had monitored it, and that you were harmed by the later discovery (i.e. you are worse off now than if they had found it earlier. Granted, I think they should have followed up on it during your medical care. However, for a negligence claim you would have to show that

I dont think protocol is to make findings of that nature, then just wait, until it becomes full blown cancer, attacking several organs, and the procedure becomes life threatening/ . If that is how far medical technology has come, we are screwed.

There would be no need for them to remove the cyst until you had cancer, unless the cyst itself was causing symptoms that they could not treat any other way. As long as it was just a cyst that was causing no symptoms, the risk of removing it most likely exceeded the risk of leaving it alone.

What is more important than the size (as size doesn’t really indicate cancer) is the appearance of the cyst. It seems like they might have considered it a simple cyst in 2003 (and simple cysts are rarely cancerous). However, in 2011, it looks like the scan revealed a complex cyst (which can be cancerous). So to adequately address this, you would probably want to get a copy of the actual report from the scan AND a copy of the scan itself. Have another doctor look at the scan to see if the cyst appeared simple or complex. If the cyst appeared complex, and they failed to monitor it, then you have something solid to base your argument on (i.e. misdiagnosis). But you will still need to show that you were harmed by their failure to diagnose the cancer earlier. So you would need a doctor to state that the cancer would not have spread to the adrenal glands if it had been found sooner. Proving harm from the kidney removal would be difficult, as your kidney most likely would have been removed regardless of when they found it. However, if a doctor stated they could have removed the cancer without removing the kidney – then you have shown harm.

Good article here:

http://my.clevelandclinic.org/disorders/kidney_cancer/hic-simple-kidney-cysts.aspx

I am not trying to be difficult. I am playing devil’s advocate – which is something you need to do if you pursue a negligence claim.