 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Stone County v. Jason9/1/2004
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION
In this appeal from an award of benefits by the Arkansas Workers' Compensation Commission, appellants contend that there is no substantial evidence that the intradiscal electrothermal annuloplasty (IDET) procedure performed on appellee was reasonably necessary for treatment of his compensable injury. We affirm.
On March 13, 1999, appellee Bill Jason, the sheriff of Stone County, responded to a request for assistance during a snowstorm. He sustained a compensable injury when his vehicle slid out of control and struck a culvert. The lower-back injury suffered by appellee was accepted by appellants as compensable.
Appellee had also injured his back in a motor vehicle accident in 1989. He testified, however, that he had complete relief from this incident, other than general backaches, and did not recall having any significant back problems during the year preceding the date of the compensable injury.
Following the compensable injury, appellee was treated by Dr. James Zini, who referred him to Dr. Anthony McBride. After Dr. McBride ordered an MRI and evaluated appellee on June 11, 1999, he made an assessment of "degenerative disk changes with left lower extremity radiculopathy with active root tension signs" and sciatica. He prescribed medication and administered epidural steroid injections.
Although appellee reported significant improvement following the first injection, and received at least one other injection on October 26, 2000, he continued to experience problems with his back. On April 4, 2001, Dr. McBride responded to a letter from the workers' compensation carrier by stating: "I do believe that the motor vehicle accident of March 13, 1999, exacerbated his symptoms, however, as we are now two years post accident, in my opinion any continuing complaints of pain would be due to his degenerative disk disease."
Dr. Zini eventually referred appellee to Dr. Robert Valentine, who first evaluated appellee on September 27, 2001. Dr. Valentine found "lumbar discogenic pain with painful disc disruption and degenerative disc disease." He recommended that appellee have a "repeat diagnostic disc injection" to determine whether there was an annular tear. On October 23, 2001, appellee received this injection and underwent a post-discogram CT scan of the lumbar spine which, according to the report of Dr. Valentine, revealed that "L4-5 and L5-S1 were grossly abnormal, with pain produced as contrast was visible in the outer disc margin under fluoroscopy, and pain produced at very low injection pressures."
Following this scan, Dr. Valentine noted on November 12, 2001, that he had reviewed the MRI taken June 3, 1999, and the related reports. He stated that he generally agreed with the reports, except that at L4-5 there was a "suggestion in a couple of the sagitta images of increased signal intensity in the outer annulus suggestive of contained herniation at L4-5." He also noted that at L5-S1 there was a "huge, very obvious annular tear visible in a classic high intensity zone . . . . This is predictive of a painful annular tear in approximately 80-85% of cases. It is compatible with the results of his discogram."
Dr. Valentine noted that he thought appellee would be a reasonable candidate for an "intradiscal electrothermal annuloplasty" (IDET) at two levels. He performed this procedure on December 28, 2001. Appellee testified that although he continued to have back pain following the procedure, it was successful in taking pressure off his left leg.
On March 6, 2002, Dr. Valentine wrote the following in a letter to appellee's attorney: "I feel it is only reasonable to opine that the
Page 1 2 3 Arkansas Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|