Diastolic Dysfunction = Heart Disease,Unspecified

heartyoga

Guru
Messages
150
Location
Cookeville
Best answers
0
I need help clarifying some coding convention. We sometimes encounter physician reports that says "diastolic dysfunction" on echocardiograms. We have a coder that takes coding seminars literally and we need clarification. Typical conclusions for echo include: mild aortic regurgitation, mild to moderate mitral regurgitation, left atrial enlargement, diastolic dysfunction.

Our coder looked it up on ICD10Data.com and on I51.9 Heart Disease, unspecified under similar conditions is diastolic dysfunction.

Our coder insists that we are undercoding if we don't put I51.9 in. Our physician says that in patients 65 and older, diastolic dysfunction is almost always present.

We feel like we already have aortic regurgitation, mitral regurgitation and left atrial enlargement (cardiomegaly) as diagnosis. Putting in I51.9 for the sake of matching "diastolic dysfunction" and for the sake of "not undercoding" is wrong and confusing. Why would you put heart disease, unspec as if the valve disorders are not enough?

I can understand that some coding software lumps diastolic dysfunction as I51.9. To add to the complication, if patient has hypertension, then we would need to add hypertensive heart disease.

Help because this is not making sense at all.

Thanks.
 

Munzueta

Guru
Messages
155
Location
El Paso
Best answers
0
Hello everyone,

this is a common finding in echo for elderly patients as someone was stating. So when addressing this finding, the doctor is actually separating each finding for regurg, atrial enlargement and diastolic dysfunction which should be separately reportable.

Now, the way that I code this and my co-workers do as well is with I51.89.

When you go to your index under "Dysfunction" you dont have a term for systolic or diastolic but you do have a term for heart. Going dysfunction>heart guides you to code I51.89 Other ill-defined heart disease.

Hope this provides a better idea.
 
Top