{"page":"https://casescribe.ai/explorer/conditions/varicose-veins","generated_at":"2026-10-03T18:34:09.314Z","data_as_of":{"decisions":944125,"first_year":2017,"last_year":2026,"latest_decision":"2026-04-30","cfr":"2026-10-01","m21":"2026-09-29"},"about":{"publisher":"CaseScribe AI (VA Law Explorer)","source":"Public Board of Veterans' Appeals decisions (appeals of VA decisions, not VA's first decisions), M21-1 Adjudication Procedures Manual, 38 CFR Parts 3 and 4.","method":"Outcomes are issue-level: each condition the Board decided in a decision counts once. Decision data is extracted by AI and can contain errors. Rates describe past appeals and do not predict any claim.","disclaimer":"For research only. CaseScribe AI is not a law firm and this is not legal advice. Verify figures against the source decisions and regulations.","attribution":"Cite as: VA Law Explorer, CaseScribe AI, with the page URL."},"data":{"condition":"Varicose veins","all_conditions_granted_pct":19.4,"decisions":1602,"years":"2017-2026","granted_pct":20.4,"denied_pct":36.4,"remanded_pct":44.8,"granted_on_merits_pct":35.9,"by_year":[{"year":2017,"issues":173,"granted_pct":17.3,"denied_pct":37,"remanded_pct":40.5},{"year":2018,"issues":250,"granted_pct":14.8,"denied_pct":37.6,"remanded_pct":44.8},{"year":2019,"issues":223,"granted_pct":20.6,"denied_pct":41.7,"remanded_pct":36.8},{"year":2020,"issues":270,"granted_pct":22.2,"denied_pct":39.3,"remanded_pct":37.4},{"year":2021,"issues":228,"granted_pct":18.4,"denied_pct":39.5,"remanded_pct":41.7},{"year":2022,"issues":215,"granted_pct":27,"denied_pct":30.2,"remanded_pct":40.9},{"year":2023,"issues":229,"granted_pct":18.8,"denied_pct":25.3,"remanded_pct":54.1},{"year":2024,"issues":237,"granted_pct":21.9,"denied_pct":33.3,"remanded_pct":44.3},{"year":2025,"issues":240,"granted_pct":12.9,"denied_pct":41.7,"remanded_pct":45},{"year":2026,"issues":88,"granted_pct":27.3,"denied_pct":26.1,"remanded_pct":46.6}],"benefit_of_doubt_in_grants_pct":69.1,"evidence_on_merits":[{"evidence":"va_exam_favorable","decisions_with":192,"granted_pct_with":60,"granted_pct_without":31.2},{"evidence":"va_exam_unfavorable","decisions_with":1123,"granted_pct_with":32.1,"granted_pct_without":51.1},{"evidence":"nexus_positive","decisions_with":210,"granted_pct_with":63.4,"granted_pct_without":30.9},{"evidence":"nexus_negative","decisions_with":711,"granted_pct_with":31.7,"granted_pct_without":39.7},{"evidence":"private_opinion","decisions_with":487,"granted_pct_with":44.5,"granted_pct_without":31.1},{"evidence":"treating_physician","decisions_with":86,"granted_pct_with":46.2,"granted_pct_without":35.1},{"evidence":"lay_statement","decisions_with":1291,"granted_pct_with":36.3,"granted_pct_without":33.9},{"evidence":"buddy_statement","decisions_with":43,"granted_pct_with":65.4,"granted_pct_without":35.1},{"evidence":"combat_service","decisions_with":63,"granted_pct_with":41.7,"granted_pct_without":35.7}],"top_reasons":{"granted":[{"reason":"current diagnosis established","decisions":20},{"reason":"caused by the service-connected disability","decisions":13},{"reason":"persistent edema incompletely relieved by elevation","decisions":6},{"reason":"service connection established","decisions":6},{"reason":"beginning stasis pigmentation","decisions":4},{"reason":"new and material evidence submitted to reopen claim","decisions":3}],"denied":[{"reason":"preponderance of the evidence against the claim","decisions":56},{"reason":"no in-service complaints, treatment or diagnosis","decisions":52},{"reason":"service records negative or silent","decisions":46},{"reason":"va examiner: less likely than not related to service","decisions":35},{"reason":"current diagnosis established","decisions":23},{"reason":"no current diagnosis","decisions":21}]},"recent_examples":{"granted":[{"case_id":"A26040808","year":2026,"judge":"R. BISIGNANI","rationale":"Veteran's symptoms analogous to DC 7120 criteria; Benefit of doubt resolved in veteran's favor; Activity-limiting pain reported"},{"case_id":"A26032943","year":2026,"judge":"JENNIFER HWA","rationale":"Private medical opinion found varicose veins at least as likely as not due to hypertension; Opinion cited multifactorial pathophysiological process; Opinion was highly probative due to thorough rationale and medical literature"},{"case_id":"A26032005","year":2026,"judge":"DUSTIN L. WARE","rationale":"Resolving reasonable doubt in Veteran's favor; Caused by NSAID use for service-connected conditions; Criteria for service connection met"}],"denied":[{"case_id":"A26037688","year":2026,"judge":"A. C. MACKENZIE","rationale":"VA examination findings consistent with 10% rating; Lack of persistent edema or other findings for higher rating; Veteran's lay assertions not more persuasive than objective medical findings"},{"case_id":"A26034389","year":2026,"judge":"MICHAEL A. PAPPAS","rationale":"No current diagnosis of varicose veins in service treatment records.; No complaints, treatment, or diagnosis of varicose veins in post-service records.; Evidence persuasively weighs against finding of varicose veins.; Benefit-of-the-doubt rule not applicable."},{"case_id":"A26033803","year":2026,"judge":"DAVID H. ROBERTSON","rationale":"No in-service complaints or treatment documented in STRs; VA examiner opined less likely than not related to service; Examiner found no correlation with herbicide or jet mechanic exposures"}]},"how_va_rates":null,"rules":[]}}