The Board has remanded the case due to a failure to obtain an adequate VA medical opinion regarding the etiology of the Veteran's atrial fibrillation. The examiner is asked to provide an opinion on whether it is at least as likely as not that the Veteran's atrial fibrillation had its onset in or is otherwise etiologically related to service, including his October 1986 treatment for chest pain and loss of consciousness.
The deciding factor: The Board found that the April 2018 VA medical opinion was inadequate because it did not provide a reasoned opinion with rationale for the examiner's conclusions and did not address the Veteran's contention that his atrial fibrillation is related to his exposure to herbicide agents in service.
- Claimed conditions
- atrial fibrillation
- How they argued it
- Direct service connection
- Exposure basis
- None
- Rating assigned
- None in this decision
- Decision date
- December 5, 2023
- Citation
- A23034726
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. Look up the original decision on VA.gov (opens in a new tab) using citation A23034726.
What this means for you
A remand is not a loss. The Board sent the case back for more development — often a new exam or missing records — before making a final decision. Many remands later end in a grant, and the decision spells out exactly what the Board wanted to see.
What you can do next
Related decisions
Other Board decisions on a similar condition or argued the same way.
- Granted
The Board has granted service connection for atrial fibrillation and distressed heart (previously claimed as irregular heartbeat) based on evidence of a link to the Veteran's military service.
- Denied
The Board has denied the Veteran's claims for service connection for right groin pain, hypertension, atrial fibrillation, cardiac arrest residuals, left kidney disease, stroke residuals, vertigo, and vision loss. The evidence does not support a finding that any of these conditions were incurred in or are otherwise related to service.,The Board found no credible evidence showing the Veteran experienced any of these conditions during his active duty service.
- Remanded (sent back)
The Board has determined that new and relevant evidence has been received for the claims of service connection for bilateral dry eye disorder, atrial fibrillation (including as secondary to hypertension), left eye disorder other than dry eye including amaurosis fugax, and right foot or ankle disorder (including as secondary to left foot and/or left ankle disability). The appeals are remanded due to insufficient evidence in the current record.
- Granted
The Board has determined that the Veteran's atrial fibrillation is at least as likely as not related to his active-duty service and grants service connection for this condition.
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.