Erectile dysfunction decisions — 2009

The VA determined that the Veteran's benign prostatic hyperplasia and erectile dysfunction were not incurred during active duty, nor can they be presumed due to herbicide exposure. The evidence does not support a finding of service connection for these conditions.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's service-connected Type II diabetes mellitus has aggravated his coronary artery disease, hypertension, and erectile dysfunction disorders.

The claim for a higher evaluation of diabetes mellitus, type II is granted and the effective date is set at March 18, 2004. Service connection for hyperlipidemia, cervical spine disability, left knee disability, and erectile dysfunction are all denied.

The Board has denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for a prostate disability and erectile dysfunction, finding that there is no evidence of such disabilities during his military service and insufficient competent medical evidence to establish a nexus between any current disabilities and his service.

The Veteran's erectile dysfunction is likely a result of his service-connected diabetes mellitus, which aggravates the condition.

The Veteran withdrew his appeal regarding the issue of service connection for erectile dysfunction, which was related to a right orchialgia as a residual of a right inguinal hernia repair and hydrocele excision. The case is remanded for an increased initial rating for a right orchialgia with oligospermia.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's service-connected diabetes mellitus is more likely than not a cause of his current erectile dysfunction, and thus grants service connection for ED as secondary to diabetes.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining medical records and arranging for VA examinations to address the Veteran's claims for service connection of depression, multi-level degenerative changes, and erectile dysfunction.

The Veteran is entitled to the services outlined in his Individual Independent Living Plan (IILP) for the period from July 27, 2005 to August 1, 2006.

The Veteran's bilateral pes planus and erectile dysfunction were shown in service and continue to be shown thereafter, warranting service connection for these conditions.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for a Travel Board hearing. The issue remains whether he should be granted service connection for erectile dysfunction, which may or may not be related to his diabetes mellitus.

The Veteran's erectile dysfunction was not incurred in or aggravated by active service, and is not proximately due to, the result of, or aggravated by a service-connected disability.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded due to the lack of evidence confirming his presence in Vietnam, which would allow for presumptive service connection based on Agent Orange exposure. The RO must verify if the Veteran was exposed to herbicides while serving in Thailand.

The Veteran's diabetes mellitus with erectile dysfunction is currently rated at 20 percent, and the Board finds that a higher rating is not warranted.

The Board has remanded the case for further development due to inadequate medical opinions regarding the Veteran's erectile dysfunction and its relationship to his service-connected PTSD.

The Veteran is not entitled to an initial evaluation in excess of 40 percent for adenocarcinoma of the prostate, status-post prostatectomy with erectile dysfunction prior to September 29, 2004.

The Veteran's claim for a TDIU is being remanded due to the need for additional development, including obtaining employment information and a VA examination.

The Board denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for diabetes mellitus, erectile dysfunction as secondary to diabetes mellitus, and cataracts as secondary to diabetes mellitus due to lack of evidence linking these conditions to service.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's erectile dysfunction was not incurred in or aggravated by service and is not proximately due to or the result of a service-connected disability, including his PTSD.

The Veteran's claims for service connection were denied, with the exception of a denial for bilateral hearing loss. The Board found that new and material evidence had not been received to reopen his right eye disability claim. His other claims were also denied.