Hypertension (high blood pressure) decisions — 2015

The Board found that the Veteran's hypertension and heart disease were not incurred in or aggravated by service, nor are they proximately due to his service-connected PTSD.

The Board has determined that the Veteran does not have a current diagnosis of hypertension and there is no evidence linking her elevated blood pressure readings to service. Therefore, the claim for service connection for hypertension is denied.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining a medical opinion regarding service connection for coronary artery disease and reopening claims for diabetes mellitus, type II, hypertension, bilateral hearing loss, tinnitus, and PTSD.

The Veteran's PTSD is rated at 50% and his hypertension is not service-connected. The decision on PTSD grants the rating, but does not address the hypertension.

The Board found that the Veteran's hypertension did not meet the criteria for a compensable rating under Diagnostic Code 7101, as his blood pressure readings were not consistently at or above the levels required to warrant such a rating.

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

The Veteran has withdrawn his appeals regarding the rating for PTSD and service connection for a back disability, hypertension, prostate disability, and restless leg syndrome. The case is dismissed.

The Board has reopened the claim of service connection for hypertension and granted it, finding that the Veteran's current diagnosis of hypertension is aggravated by his service-connected diabetes mellitus.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's bilateral hearing loss is related to his in-service noise exposure, and service connection for this condition is granted. The Board found no evidence of a low back disability, hypertension, or an acquired psychiatric disorder during service or within one year post-service, and thus denied these claims.

The Board found that the Veteran's hypertension did not have its clinical onset in service, was not exhibited within the first post-service year, and is not otherwise related to active duty. The VA examiner opined that the current hypertension is not likely caused by service.

The Board found no evidence of herbicide exposure and denied service connection for diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and prostate cancer.

The Veteran's hypertension is found to be aggravated by his service-connected PTSD with OCD, and the claim for service connection is granted.

The Veteran's hypertension is not due to his presumed herbicide exposure or any other disease or injury that was incurred in or aggravated by active service. The Veteran's PTSD has been granted with a 10% evaluation, but the claim for an increased rating remains pending.

The Veteran's claims for an initial compensable evaluation for prostatitis with UTIs, service connection for hypertension, and kidney disability are being remanded due to the need for additional development. The Veteran testified that his symptoms have worsened since his last VA examination in 2009, and he submitted medical evidence suggesting a possible link between his current health issues and service.

The Board denied service connection for various conditions, including psychiatric disorders, diabetes mellitus, retinopathy, knee and back disorders, hypertension, genitourinary issues, skin conditions, arthritis, traumatic brain injury, fibromyalgia, Reiter's syndrome, autoimmune disorder, hand and elbow disorders, and kidney problems. The decision also denied a temporary total rating for convalescence purposes due to right thumb fracture.

The Veteran's bilateral ocular hypertension is found to be related to his military service and granted.,The status of the claim for compound myopic astigmatism remains unclear.

The Veteran's cervical spine disability and hypertension were not incurred in or aggravated by active military service, nor may such disabilities be presumed to have been so incurred. The case is being remanded for additional development.

The Board has decided to remand the case for further development and an addendum VA opinion regarding the Veteran's claim of service connection for erectile dysfunction as secondary to his service-connected conditions.

The Board has remanded the case due to new evidence and further development is required.

The Veteran's hypertension is not service-connected as it did not manifest during or within one year after service, and there is no evidence of a nexus to herbicide exposure. Additionally, the medical opinion does not support a secondary relationship between his diabetes mellitus and hypertension.