Hypertension (high blood pressure) Board decisions

The Veteran's appeal is remanded due to the need for additional opinions regarding his ability to secure and follow a substantially gainful occupation given his service-connected disabilities.

The Veteran's claim of service connection for hypertension has been reopened and is now granted due to the submission of new evidence that relates to an unestablished fact (lack of a preexisting diagnosis) and his current diagnosis.

The Veteran's acquired psychiatric disorder and hypertension are found to be related to service, thus granting service connection for both conditions.

The Veteran's claims are being remanded for additional development due to the need for service personnel records and unit history documentation related to his claimed exposure to Agent Orange.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining updated VA treatment records and a new VA examination to address the etiology of the Veteran's hypertension. The issue of service connection for sleep apnea is also being remanded for issuance of a Statement of the Case.

The Board has remanded the case due to incomplete records and inadequate examination, requiring further development of the hypertension claim.

The Veteran's hypertension claim is being remanded for further development, including a new VA examination and clarification of representation.

The Board has determined that the Veteran's current heart disorder and hypertension are not related to his period of service, including any exposure to Agent Orange. As such, he is not entitled to service connection for these conditions.

The Board found that there is no evidence showing a direct or presumptive relationship between the Veteran's hypertension and his active duty service, nor did any medical opinion support a finding of secondary service connection due to PTSD. The VA examiner opined that it was less likely than not that the Veteran's hypertension was caused by or aggravated by his service-connected PTSD.

The Veteran's combined disability rating is 60%, which does not meet the criteria for a TDIU under 38 C.F.R. § 4.16(a). The Board finds that his service-connected disabilities do not render him unable to secure or follow a substantially gainful occupation.

The Board finds that the Veteran's hypertension is likely due to his service-connected diabetes mellitus, and grants secondary service connection for this condition.

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

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including obtaining medical records and arranging for examinations to determine the nature and etiology of the Veteran's claimed disabilities.

The Veteran's service connection claims for a back disorder and peripheral neuropathy of the bilateral upper and lower extremities have been denied as there is no evidence to support a direct relationship between these conditions and his military service.

The Veteran's alopecia and hypertension have been granted initial compensable ratings.

The Board has remanded the claims for additional development due to a failure to obtain deck logs from the USS Annapolis, which may contain information relevant to the Veteran's exposure to Agent Orange and his service connection claims.

The Board found that the Veteran's hypertension did not occur during service and is not related to any service-connected condition, thus denying his claim for service connection.

The Board found that the Veteran's hypertension was not incurred in or aggravated by military service, and it could not be presumed to have been incurred in service. The Board also noted that the disability did not manifest itself within one year of separation from active duty. Therefore, the claim for service connection for hypertension was denied.

The Veteran's appeal is being remanded to obtain additional evidence and for further development, including a VA examination to assess the severity of his service-connected disabilities and their relationship to any bilateral knee disability.

The Board has dismissed the appeal due to the appellant's withdrawal of his claims.