Erectile dysfunction Board decisions

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities, including diabetes mellitus and peripheral neuropathy of the upper and lower extremities, have been rated at a combined 70 percent effective August 15, 2011. These conditions are found to preclude substantially gainful employment.

The Veteran's hypertension, varicose veins in each leg prior to February 25, 2011, and erectile dysfunction have been evaluated based on their current manifestations. The Veteran does not meet the criteria for a higher rating under any applicable diagnostic codes.

The Board denied service connection for diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and erectile dysfunction as they are not related to service. The Veteran's CAD was rated at 30% but the Board found indications of an exceptional disability picture and referred the case on an extraschedular basis.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for further development of his claims, including obtaining a report of the service retirement examination and scheduling him for sleep and genitourinary examinations to determine the nature and etiology of any diagnosed conditions.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for erectile dysfunction is being remanded due to the need for a VA examination to determine the etiology of his condition.

The Veteran's diabetes mellitus, nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy, and erectile dysfunction are currently evaluated as 20 percent disabling. The Board found that the evidence did not support a higher rating for any of these conditions.

The Veteran's service-connected prostate cancer has been rated as 100 percent disabling for nearly 7 years, and this disability is permanent. The Board finds that the appellant-daughter meets the criteria for entitlement to Dependent's Educational Assistance (DEA) benefits under Chapter 35.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's erectile dysfunction is not caused by, aggravated by, or related to his service-connected degenerative joint disease of the lumbosacral spine or prostate cancer. The appeal for service connection on these secondary theories is denied.

The Veteran is entitled to an effective date of May 3, 2010 for the award of TDIU due to service-connected disabilities.

The Board has dismissed the appeal as the appellant withdrew it prior to a decision being made.

The Veteran's claims for service connection are being remanded due to the need for additional development and medical inquiry into his diabetes, heart disorder, digestive disorder, neuropathy of the hands and feet, erectile dysfunction (ED), and skin cancer.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including obtaining VA and private medical records, adjudicating a claim of service connection for hypertension, and securing an opinion from a VA urologist regarding whether erectile dysfunction is caused or aggravated by depression, nonspecific urethritis, and/or hypertension.

The Board has found that further RO action is necessary to obtain a temporary claims file, which may contain relevant information for the Veteran's claims. The case will be remanded for this purpose and subsequent readjudication.

The Veteran's service-connected disabilities do not render him incapable of securing or following a substantially gainful occupation.

The Veteran's prostate cancer, erectile dysfunction, incontinence, and kidney stones were not found to be related to his service or exposure to herbicides.

The Board found that the Veteran's urethra disability, including bladder and bowel incontinence, was not caused by VA surgical treatment in 1963 and 1972. The Veteran's current conditions are attributed to multiple factors unrelated to his surgeries.

The Veteran's depression, hypertension and erectile dysfunction are being reviewed to determine if they are related to his service-connected type 2 diabetes mellitus.

The Board found that the Veteran's erectile dysfunction did not meet the criteria for a compensable rating under Diagnostic Code 7522, as there was no evidence of penile deformity. The claim is denied.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's erectile dysfunction is not causally related to or aggravated by his service-connected diabetes, and therefore denied the claim of service connection for erectile dysfunction secondary to diabetes.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for further development and examination to determine his employability due to service-connected disabilities.