Hypertension (high blood pressure) decisions — 2012

The Board has determined that the Veteran's claims for earlier effective dates are denied as there is no evidence showing a claim was filed prior to April 24, 2007.

The Veteran's appeal is remanded due to the need for additional medical opinions regarding his hypertension and anxiety disorder, as well as the need for a statement of the case on the increased rating issue.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded for additional development, including obtaining SSA records.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for hypertension, to include as secondary to sleep apnea, is being remanded due to the need for a VA examination and additional development of his medical records.

The Board has granted service connection for hypertension and right ear hearing loss, finding that the Veteran's conditions are likely due to his active service. The issues of increased rating for bilateral hip disability and TDIU have also been granted.

The Veteran has withdrawn his appeal, and the Board does not have jurisdiction to review these issues.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining medical opinions and gathering treatment records. The Veteran's claims are not yet decided.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's headaches are aggravated by his service-connected hypertension, and thus grants service connection for headaches as secondary to hypertension.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for depression has been granted. The Board found that the Veteran's manifestations of diagnosed depression cannot be meaningfully separated from his manifestations of service-connected PTSD.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's anxiety claim is withdrawn. The laryngeal cancer claim was denied as there is no reasonable possibility it was caused by ionizing radiation exposure during service.

The Board found no evidence of hypertension during service or within one year after service, and denied the claim for service connection for hypertension as it is not related to military service.

The Veteran's claim for service connection for hypertension was denied as he failed to report for a scheduled VA examination without good cause.

The Veteran has withdrawn his appeals on all issues except for the right ear hearing loss and rectal incontinence. The Board will not have jurisdiction to review these remaining issues.

The Veteran's claims for service connection were denied as the evidence did not support a finding that any of the claimed conditions were incurred or aggravated by active duty.

The Veteran's claims for service connection for hypertension, heart disease, and an increased rating for tinea versicolor were denied. The claim for tinea versicolor was granted with a 30% disability rating.

The Veteran's claims for service connection are being remanded due to the need for additional development, including obtaining service treatment records and personnel records. The claims of service connection for residuals of a right fifth finger fracture, bilateral hearing loss disability, cold injury to hands and feet, hypertension, hypercholesterolemia, and diabetes mellitus type 2 will be deferred until further development is completed.

The Board found that the Veteran's hypertension is not attributable to his service-connected PTSD and denied the claim.

The Board is remanding the case for additional development, including obtaining private medical records and a VA examination to determine if hypertension was caused by or aggravated by service-connected posttraumatic stress disorder or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug use for other service-connected disabilities.

The Board has remanded the case for further development, including obtaining an audiogram and scheduling a VA examination to address the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss and hypertension claims. The Veteran is also scheduled for another VA examination to determine if his hypertension is related to service or aggravated by PTSD.

The Veteran's hypertension, which required medication for control throughout the appeal period, did not meet the criteria for a compensable evaluation as it was predominantly less than 100 in diastolic pressure and less than 160 in systolic pressure. As such, he is denied an initial compensable evaluation.