Wiki Billing 33223 w/33262

Create Wiki
A

amym

Guest
Messages
241
Location
Loganville, GA
Best answers
0
We have performed a Single Chamber ICD generator change and pocket revision. The pocket revision was done to accomodate the size and shape of the new ICD. Medicare bundled CPT 33262, the generator change, into 33223. Is it ok to append a -59 modifier to CPT 33262 under this circumstance? -Thanks
 
Pocket revision

amym said:
We have performed a Single Chamber ICD generator change and pocket revision. The pocket revision was done to accomodate the size and shape of the new ICD. Medicare bundled CPT 33262, the generator change, into 33223. Is it ok to append a -59 modifier to CPT 33262 under this circumstance? -Thanks
Click to expand...

You can append modifier 59 to 33223 but the pocket revision needs to be extensive, not just 'the pocket was revised to accommodate the new generator'. If they just did the minor revision, don't bill it. I only bill it if the revision is extensive or a completely new pocket is created due to migration of the device , or the device is very superficial and causing pain requiring complete remodelling of the pocket. In these instances I use Dx code 996.72 and ,if applicable, a pain code per ICD-9 instructions.
 
"The pocket was made bigger to accomodate the bigger footprint of the defibrillator and irrigated with antibiotic solution." Would this qualify as extensive?
 
amym said:
"The pocket was made bigger to accomodate the bigger footprint of the defibrillator and irrigated with antibiotic solution." Would this qualify as extensive?
Click to expand...

No, definitely not. That scenario happens with most generator changes. "Extensive" and "revision" are really the keywords here.
These are my opinions only but, from experience, they are appropriate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top