BVA decisions by condition
Coronary artery disease (cad): BVA grant rates and what wins
From 2017 to 2026, the Board of Veterans' Appeals decided a coronary artery disease (cad) issue in 627 decisions. It granted the coronary artery disease (cad) issue in 19.1% of them, close to the 19.4% grant rate for all conditions, denied it in 15.0%, and remanded it in 62.5%. Counting only decisions on the merits (granted or denied), 56.1% were granted.
Decisions
627
2017–2026
Granted
19.1%
All conditions: 19.4%
Granted on the merits
56.1%
Granted ÷ (granted + denied)
Remanded
62.5%
Denied: 15.0%
Coronary artery disease (cad) outcomes by year
| Year | Issues decided | Granted | Denied | Remanded | Other |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2017 | 51 | 9.8% | 19.6% | 58.8% | 11.8% |
| 2018 | 95 | 7.4% | 24.2% | 60.0% | 8.4% |
| 2019 | 92 | 22.8% | 16.3% | 58.7% | 2.2% |
| 2020 | 64 | 31.3% | 17.2% | 50.0% | 1.6% |
| 2021 | 70 | 8.6% | 14.3% | 72.9% | 4.3% |
| 2022 | 77 | 20.8% | 15.6% | 62.3% | 1.3% |
| 2023 | 75 | 26.7% | 10.7% | 58.7% | 4.0% |
Each row counts issues (each condition the Board decided), so the shares add up to 100%. Other: dismissed, withdrawn or no clear outcome. Years with fewer than 50 issues are left out.
Evidence in granted and denied coronary artery disease (cad) decisions
For each kind of supporting evidence: how often the Board granted the coronary artery disease (cad) issue on the merits when the decision mentioned it, compared with decisions that did not. These are associations, not causes, and evidence is recorded per decision, not per issue.
| In the record | Decisions | Granted when present | When absent | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Positive nexus opinion | 104 | 78.0% | 50.9% | +27.2 pts |
| Favorable VA exam | 97 | 70.0% | 51.8% | +18.2 pts |
| Claimed as secondary | 86 | 70.0% | 52.9% | +17.1 pts |
| Treating physician opinion | 44 | 64.7% | 55.3% | +9.4 pts |
| Private medical opinion | 224 | 57.9% | 54.6% | +3.3 pts |
| Combat service | 40 | 58.3% | 55.9% | +2.4 pts |
| Lay statement | 434 | 54.8% | 59.3% | −4.5 pts |
- The Board applied the benefit-of-the-doubt rule (38 CFR 3.102) in 65.8% of the decisions that granted coronary artery disease (cad).
- The Board found the veteran's statements credible in 25.0% of grants and 8.5% of denials.
Negative evidence in the record
An unfavorable exam or a negative nexus opinion often sits in the same record as favorable evidence, and the Board weighs them against each other. So these rows show how often coronary artery disease (cad) was still granted when the record contained the negative item, not that the item helped.
| In the record | Decisions | Granted when present | When absent | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Negative nexus opinion | 254 | 50.6% | 59.4% | −8.8 pts |
| Unfavorable VA exam | 415 | 49.7% | 72.9% | −23.2 pts |
Why the Board granted or denied coronary artery disease (cad)
Most common reasons in grants
- Current diagnosis established12
- Veteran diagnosed with cad4
- Veteran served in thailand during vietnam era4
- Presumed exposure to herbicide agents due to vietnam service2
- Service connection established2
- Cad is presumptively linked to herbicide exposure under 38 c.f.r. § 3.309(e)2
Most common reasons in denials
- Preponderance of the evidence against the claim11
- No in-service complaints, treatment or diagnosis7
- Current diagnosis established3
- Continuity of symptomatology since service2
- Hypertension not service-connected2
- VA examiner: less likely than not related to service2
- No evidence of cardiac hypertrophy or dilatation2
- Congestive heart failure noted as comorbid in july 2018, but not chronic1
Numbers are decisions that gave the reason. Reasons are short phrases extracted by AI from each decision; common wordings of the same reason are grouped. Benefit of the doubt is reported above.
Recent coronary artery disease (cad) decisions
Granted
PACT Act expanded presumptive herbicide exposure to Guam.; CAD is an enumerated disease under 38 U.S.C. § 1116.; Service records confirm in-service presence in Guam.
Addendum medical opinions from November 2025 found it at least as likely as not that panic disorder aggravates the conditions.; Examiner reasoned recurrent panic attacks can increase chest wall tension, perceived pain sensitivity, and trigger arrhythmia episodes or chest discomfort.; Board found competent and probative evidence demonstrates aggravation by service-connected panic disorder.
Evidence in equipoise from July 25, 2025, regarding METs level.; Benefit of the doubt applied due to equipoise.; Private opinion from Dr. K.G. assessed METs level as 3.0-5.0.
Denied
Evidence reflected METs level of 5.1-7.0 during this period.; Veteran's CAD did not meet criteria for higher rating.; VA examinations in Oct 2020 and Dec 2022 assessed METs at 5.1-7.0.
Condition controlled with continuous medication; No further heart failure symptoms or functional impact noted; VA examination did not elicit symptoms at any METs level
No in-service complaints, treatment, or diagnosis of CV disorder or symptoms.; Separation examination reflected normal heart/vascular evaluation.; No direct nexus established by healthcare professional.; No chronic CV disease shown in service or continuity of symptomatology.; Veteran's duties did not involve regular contact with base perimeter for herbicide exposure.
Rules that apply to coronary artery disease (cad) claims
- 38 CFR 3.303
Principles of service connection
Read it in VA Law Explorer - 38 CFR 3.310
Secondary service connection and aggravation
Read it in VA Law Explorer - 38 CFR 3.102
Reasonable doubt (benefit of the doubt)
Read it in VA Law Explorer
Research your coronary artery disease (cad) case
Narrow by year, judge, evidence or secondary condition, read the decisions, and export a research memo.
How these numbers are calculated
- Rates count decisions in which the Board decided a coronary artery disease (cad) issue, by the outcome of that issue. Other issues in the same decision can have different outcomes.
- “Granted on the merits” leaves out remands and dismissals. “All conditions” is the grant share across every condition issue in the data.
- The data comes from CaseScribe's AI extraction of public BVA decisions (2017–2026) and can contain errors. It is updated automatically as new decisions are added.