Glaucoma decisions — 2008
129 indexed Board decisions in 2008.
Badges describe the whole decision, not the outcome for every condition listed. An appeal can grant one issue and deny or remand another. Check the original decision for each issue; these outcomes do not predict your claim.
- Whole decision: DismissedApril 2008
The veteran withdrew his appeal for several issues, and the remaining claims were denied or dismissed.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)April 2008
The Board remands the claims for further development to obtain medical opinions regarding whether the service-connected diabetes mellitus aggravated the veteran's glaucoma and erectile dysfunction.
- Whole decision: DeniedApril 2008
The veteran's glaucoma was not the result of carelessness, negligence, lack of proper skill, error in judgment or similar instance of fault on the part of the VA in furnishing medical treatment; it did not represent an event that was not reasonably foreseeable; and it was not attributable to the VA's failure to diagnose and/or treat a preexisting glaucoma when the VA provided treatment.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)April 2008
The appeal is remanded to the RO for additional development, including obtaining medical opinions on direct service connection and in-service aggravation questions.
- Whole decision: DeniedApril 2008
The Board found that the preponderance of the evidence does not demonstrate a current disability manifested by diabetic retinopathy or that the veteran's currently diagnosed glaucoma was caused or aggravated by his service-connected diabetes mellitus.
- Whole decision: DeniedApril 2008
The Board denied service connection for COPD, glaucoma, exogenous obesity, hypothyroidism, and hyperlipidemia each claimed to be secondary to diabetes mellitus.
- Whole decision: DeniedApril 2008
The veteran's claims for service connection for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and glaucoma were denied due to a lack of credible supporting evidence of in-service stressors for PTSD, and no medical evidence linking the current conditions to his military service.
- Whole decision: DeniedApril 2008
The Board denied service connection for the veteran's claimed conditions, including glaucoma, cataracts, optic nerve cupping of the left eye, enucleation of the right eye due to glaucoma, radiation poisoning, loss of voice, residuals of a neck injury, and residuals of a left leg and groin injury. The evidence did not establish that any of these conditions were incurred in or aggravated by service.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)March 2008
The appeal was remanded for the veteran to be scheduled for a Travel Board hearing.
- Whole decision: DeniedMarch 2008
The Board denied service connection for the veteran's claimed conditions as there was no evidence of a current disability or a link to service.
- Whole decision: DeniedMarch 2008
The Board has determined that the veteran's glaucoma is not related to his service-connected diabetes mellitus, and a separate compensable disability evaluation for hypertension as a diabetic complication is denied.
- Whole decision: DeniedMarch 2008
The Board denied the veteran's claims for service connection for lumbar syndrome with X-ray evidence of scoliosis and arthritis, early degenerative changes of both wrists, and glaucoma and cataracts. The appeals were based on direct service connection.
- Whole decision: DeniedMarch 2008
The Board found that the veteran's bilateral glaucoma and macular hole of the left eye were not incurred in or aggravated by service. The deviated septum was assigned a 10 percent rating, which is the highest rating authorized for traumatic deviated nasal septum.
- Whole decision: DeniedMarch 2008
The Board denied service connection for anemia, exposure to Agent Orange, and increased evaluations for diabetes mellitus, thyroidectomy residuals, peripheral neuropathy of the upper and lower extremities. Service connection was granted for residuals of a thyroidectomy with a noncompensable rating.
- Whole decision: DeniedMarch 2008
The veteran's disabilities do not meet the criteria for special monthly pension by reason of being in need of regular aid and attendance or housebound.
- Whole decision: GrantedMarch 2008
The Board granted service connection for the veteran's left knee disability, GERD with hiatal hernia, and chronic open angle glaucoma. The initial evaluations assigned were 10 percent each.
- Whole decision: DeniedFebruary 2008
The veteran's claim for secondary service connection for peripheral neuropathy of the bilateral upper extremities, a disorder of the left lower extremity, glaucoma, and bladder disorder is denied as there are no current diagnoses that support these claims.,The veteran's claim for secondary service connection for coronary artery disease (including hypertension) is denied as there is no evidence of such condition.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)February 2008
The Board has determined that the VA examinations and opinions are inadequate for evaluation purposes, necessitating further examination to determine if the veteran's glaucoma is related to his service-connected peripheral neuropathy and if his heart disease is proximately due or permanently aggravated by his diabetes mellitus.
- Whole decision: GrantedFebruary 2008
The Board granted service connection for lumbar spondylosis and status post radial and ulnar fracture with right elbow post-traumatic arthropathy, both rated at 10 percent. Service connection was denied for sciatic joint dysfunction and glaucoma.
- Whole decision: Partly grantedFebruary 2008
The Board finds that the veteran's pulmonary disorder, claimed as COPD and asthma, may be related to his in-service exposure during Project SHAD. However, there is a reasonable doubt about this connection.,Regarding glaucoma with cataracts, post-extraction, with IOL placement, the evidence raises a reasonable doubt as to whether it was caused by steroid use for service-connected respiratory disabilities.
We are not the VA. Veterans’ Rights is an independent resource built for veterans. We are not the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, not part of the government, and not endorsed by any government agency.
This is general information, not legal advice. For advice about your own situation, talk to a VA-accredited representative — many help for free.