BVA decisions by condition
Myocardial infarction: BVA grant rates and what wins
From 2018 to 2026, the Board of Veterans' Appeals decided a myocardial infarction issue in 899 decisions. It granted the myocardial infarction issue in 21.9% of them, above the 19.9% grant rate for all conditions, denied it in 26.1%, and remanded it in 50.1%. Counting only decisions on the merits (granted or denied), 45.6% were granted.
Decisions
899
2018–2026
Granted
21.9%
All conditions: 19.9%
Granted on the merits
45.6%
Granted ÷ (granted + denied)
Remanded
50.1%
Denied: 26.1%
Myocardial infarction outcomes by year
| Year | Decisions | Granted | Denied | Remanded |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2018 | 101 | 8.9% | 35.6% | 50.5% |
| 2019 | 118 | 18.6% | 22.0% | 57.6% |
| 2020 | 117 | 15.4% | 28.2% | 54.7% |
| 2021 | 116 | 26.7% | 31.0% | 41.4% |
| 2022 | 88 | 18.2% | 18.2% | 64.8% |
| 2023 | 105 | 29.5% | 19.0% | 51.4% |
| 2024 | 90 | 23.3% | 28.9% | 43.3% |
| 2025 | 113 | 29.2% | 24.8% | 45.1% |
| 2026 | 51 | 31.4% | 27.5% | 35.3% |
Evidence in granted and denied myocardial infarction decisions
For each kind of supporting evidence: how often the Board granted the myocardial infarction 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 | 149 | 69.3% | 38.4% | +30.9 pts |
| Claimed as secondary | 242 | 64.8% | 40.5% | +24.4 pts |
| Private medical opinion | 302 | 59.8% | 35.6% | +24.2 pts |
| Treating physician opinion | 42 | 64.3% | 44.3% | +20.0 pts |
| Combat service | 54 | 61.3% | 44.4% | +16.9 pts |
| Favorable VA exam | 119 | 59.2% | 42.7% | +16.5 pts |
| Lay statement | 636 | 39.8% | 64.1% | −24.3 pts |
- The Board applied the benefit-of-the-doubt rule (38 CFR 3.102) in 67.5% of the decisions that granted myocardial infarction.
- The Board found the veteran's statements credible in 25.4% of grants and 8.9% 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 myocardial infarction 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 | 389 | 36.3% | 53.9% | −17.7 pts |
| Unfavorable VA exam | 582 | 39.0% | 64.0% | −25.0 pts |
Why the Board granted or denied myocardial infarction
Most common reasons in grants
- Current diagnosis established13
- Caused by the service-connected disability8
- VA examiner: less likely than not related to service4
- Service connection established4
- Reduction from 60% to 10 percent was improper3
- Criteria for service connection met2
- Coronary artery disease presumed related to herbicide exposure2
- Service connection granted2
Most common reasons in denials
- Preponderance of the evidence against the claim26
- VA examiner: less likely than not related to service18
- No in-service complaints, treatment or diagnosis17
- Service records negative or silent16
- No current diagnosis12
- Current diagnosis established7
- No continuity of symptomatology3
- No evidence of in-service incurrence or aggravation3
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 myocardial infarction decisions
Granted
Veteran served in Korea near DMZ during presumptive herbicide exposure period.; Lay testimony regarding duties and location corroborated by service records.; Benefit of the doubt applied to grant presumptive service connection.
Evidence supports 100% rating criteria for heart disability; August 2022 VA exam indicated 1-3 METs workload with symptoms; Consistent with prior reports of angina and shortness of breath
Conflicting medical opinions regarding service connection.; VA examiner found less likely than not secondary to environmental exposures.; Private opinions and lay statements linked condition to in-service exposures.; Board afforded veteran benefit of the doubt.
Denied
Service treatment records negative for heart condition; VA and private treatment records negative for heart condition within 12 months of separation; August 2024 and March 2025 VA medical opinions found condition less likely than not caused by TERA; Examiners cited smoking, hypertension, and diabetes as more likely causes; Board found opinions highly probative and evidence persuasively against claim
No heart symptoms noted in service treatment records.; Separation examination showed normal heart.; VA examiner provided negative nexus opinion.; No competent opinion relates current disorder to service.
No in-service complaints, diagnosis, or treatment for heart disability in service treatment records.; Diagnosis of coronary artery disease in January 2000 with significant risk factors (smoking, marijuana use, family history).; VA examination concluded less likely than not incurred due to service, citing lack of literature link to Parris Island contaminants and Veteran's risk factors.; Private medical opinion based on inaccurate Agent Orange exposure information was given no probative value.
Rules that apply to myocardial infarction 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 myocardial infarction 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 myocardial infarction 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 (2018–2026) and can contain errors. It is updated automatically as new decisions are added.