Erectile dysfunction decisions — 2010

The Veteran's claim for TDIU is being remanded due to the need for a new examination and additional VA treatment records.

The Veteran's claim for peripheral neuropathy of the upper extremities was denied as no current diagnosis could be established. The claims for hypertension, bilateral hearing loss, tinnitus, and erectile dysfunction are pending further evaluation.

The Veteran's claim for TDIU is being remanded due to the need for a new VA examination and medical opinion regarding his ability to secure and follow substantially gainful employment.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's claims for service connection and special monthly compensation were granted effective July 1, 2008. The appeal is denied as there are no earlier effective dates to be assigned.

The Board found that the Veteran's service-connected posttraumatic stress disorder did not cause or aggravate his erectile dysfunction, GERD, left knee disability, right knee degenerative joint disease, back disability, or skin disability. The claims were denied as there was no evidence to support a direct relationship between these conditions and the Veteran's period of active military service.

The Veteran's claim for a higher initial rating for erectile dysfunction was denied, as the disability does not meet the criteria for a compensable evaluation. The claim seeking a higher rate of SMC on the basis of loss of use of a creative organ is also denied as it lacks legal merit.

The Veteran's claims for PTSD, erectile dysfunction secondary to diabetes mellitus, and loss of use of a creative organ are being remanded due to the need for additional development.

The Board found that the Veteran's glaucoma and erectile dysfunction were not caused or aggravated by his service-connected diabetes mellitus, thus denying both secondary service connection claims.

The Board found that the Veteran's prostate cancer and erectile dysfunction were not incurred in or aggravated by active duty service, nor may they be presumed to have been so incurred. The Veteran's current conditions are considered to be unrelated to his service-connected removal of the left testicle with epididymectomy.

The Veteran's claims for service connection are being remanded due to the need for additional medical examination and development of records.

The Veteran's diabetes mellitus, type II, with associated complications, is currently rated at 20 percent. The Board finds that a higher rating is not warranted.

The Veteran's appeal for service connection on the issue of a kidney disorder was withdrawn prior to any decision by the Board. The remaining issues of erectile dysfunction and PTSD are remanded for further development.

The Veteran's appeal for a higher (compensable) initial disability rating for erectile dysfunction was withdrawn before the Board could make a decision. The case is being remanded to determine if there is service connection for bilateral eye disorder secondary to diabetes mellitus.

The Veteran's erectile dysfunction from July 30, 2004 is not compensable as there has been no clinical evidence of a penile deformity.

The Veteran's claim for a TDIU is being remanded due to the need for additional examination and development of his VA treatment records.

The Board denied service connection for erectile dysfunction and denied increased evaluations for PTSD, right knee, left knee, and allergy disorder. The Veteran's erectile dysfunction was not found to be related to military service or a service-connected disability.

The Board has denied service connection for sleep apnea, erectile dysfunction, dyslipidemia, kidney disease (post transplant), coronary artery disease, and hypertension.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities do not preclude him from securing or following a substantially gainful occupation, and his claim for TDIU is denied.

The Veteran's claim for a compensable evaluation for erectile dysfunction since February 10, 2005 is remanded due to the need for additional medical examination and records review.

The Veteran's claim for compensation under the provisions of 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 is being remanded due to an inadequate examination in determining that he was not entitled to benefits.