The Board found that no additional, permanent disability involving heart damage resulted from the 1980 VA hospitalization where appellant developed an allergic reaction to intravenous pyelogram dye.
The deciding factor: No additional, permanent cardiovascular disability was shown to have resulted from the 1980 VA hospitalization in question.
- Claimed conditions
- heart damage, valvular heart pathology
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating
- Not verified here — check the original decision
- Decision date
- May 8, 2001
- Citation
- 0113071
This is a plain-language summary generated by AI from a public Board of Veterans’ Appeals decision. It can contain errors — always verify against the original. Search VA.gov for the original decision (opens in a new tab) using citation 0113071.
What this means for you
A final Board denial may be appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, generally within 120 days of the Board mailing date. A Supplemental Claim with new and relevant evidence is a separate option. Another Higher-Level Review of the Board decision is not available. Check your own notice: this historical decision does not set your deadline.
What you can do next
Use your own notice and decision stage. A remanded issue is not a final court-appealable denial. VA review guidance and CAVC filing instructions (U.S. federal; reviewed October 7, 2026).
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Whole decision: Granted
The Board has granted service connection for inactive rheumatic fever, finding that the Veteran's current condition had its onset during his period of service. The issue of service connection for a heart condition other than valvular heart disease remains on appeal.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Board found that the Veteran's additional disabilities, including Parkinson's disease, tremors, heart damage, dementia, lung damage, and kidney damage, were not caused by VA's negligence or lack of proper skill in providing surgical care. The anastomotic leak was a foreseeable complication.
- Whole decision: Remanded (sent back)
The Veteran is seeking compensation under the provisions of 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 for health problems including Parkinson's disease, tremors, heart damage, dementia, lung damage, and kidney damage allegedly caused by a negligent surgical procedure and post-operative care provided by VA in December 2008.
- Whole decision: Denied
The Veteran's claims for service connection and compensation under 38 U.S.C.A. § 1151 were denied as there is no evidence of additional disability caused by VA treatment in April and May 2003, or that the current disabilities are related to active military service.
Free starter guide for your own claim
Reading this because you were denied or under-rated? Get the plain-English next steps — your appeal options, the deadline that protects you, and how appeals like yours turn out. One email, no spam.
We will only use this to send the guide. No spam, unsubscribe any time. We never sell your information.
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.