Hypertension (high blood pressure) Board decisions

The Board denied the veteran's claims for increased ratings for hypertension and low back strain, finding that the evidence did not meet the criteria for higher ratings under the applicable rating criteria.

The Board has denied the claim for service connection for the cause of the veteran's death, finding that none of the listed conditions were related to his service.

The Board found that there is no competent medical evidence establishing a nexus between any current disabilities and the veteran's active service. Therefore, the claims for service connection were denied.

The Board has denied the veteran's claims of service connection for a cardiovascular disorder, hypertension, and stroke residuals as secondary to his service-connected acquired psychiatric disorder (PTSD). The evidence does not support a link between these conditions and his service-connected condition.

The Board has remanded the case for further examination and determination of service connection for left nephrectomy, aldosteronoma, and hypertension due to chemical exposure in service.

The Board has remanded the case for additional development, including scheduling VA examinations and obtaining medical records.

The Board found no evidence to support the veteran's claims for service connection for soft tissue sarcoma, hypertension, and skin rashes due to Agent Orange exposure.

The veteran's hypertension is found to be secondary to his service-connected diabetes mellitus. For the period prior to February 14, 2005, he was granted a noncompensable rating for thoracic spine contusion. From February 14, 2005, he is granted a 10% rating.

The Board has determined that new and material evidence has been received to reopen the claim of service connection for bilateral hearing loss. However, the veteran's current hearing loss is not considered service-connected due to lack of in-service hearing impairment and no evidence showing it was caused by military noise exposure. The Board also found that hypertension is secondary to the veteran's service-connected PTSD.

The Board has remanded the case due to insufficient evidence regarding whether the veteran's hypertension is aggravated by his service-connected diabetes mellitus.

The Board denied service connection for sinusitis and hypertension, as well as residuals of a back injury, shortening of the left lower extremity, and bilateral hip disorder. The claims were not reopened due to lack of new and material evidence.

The Board has determined that the veteran does not have a current diagnosis of any of the conditions he is seeking service connection for, and therefore, these claims are denied.

The Board denied the veteran's claim of service connection for hypertension, finding that there was no evidence to support a direct or secondary relationship between his hypertension and his service-connected diabetes mellitus.

The Board has remanded the case for further development regarding service connection claims, including verification of the veteran's exposure to Agent Orange and port calls in Vietnam.

The Board found that the veteran's hypertension did not manifest during service or within one year of discharge, and there is no competent medical evidence linking his current condition to active service. Therefore, service connection for hypertension was denied.

The Board has remanded the claims for service connection due to pending issues and potential interrelated conditions.

The veteran's claims for service connection for diabetes mellitus and hypertension were denied as they are not related to his active service. The claim for a heart condition was also denied, but the decision did not consider whether new and material evidence had been received since the previous denial.

The Board denied service connection for hypertension and renal disease, finding that the evidence did not establish clear and unmistakable error in their denial.

The veteran's appeal is being remanded for a Travel Board hearing. He has not yet been scheduled for this hearing.

The Board has remanded the case due to the need for a statement of the case regarding the issue of an earlier effective date for the grant of service connection for PTSD.