Wiki Excision Pelvic Mass, Anterior Pelvic Exenteration, Radial Cystectomy, Radical Vaginectomy, Right Pelvic Lymphadenectomy, Omentectomy

Messages
2
Location
Statesboro, GA
Best answers
0
Hello Melanie and All!

Melanie or anyone, do you have any CPT suggestions for the following Surgery?

Indications for Procedure:
Ms. X is a 74 yo female with history of Breast, Uterine MMMT and Colon cancers.
She has a pre sacral mass s/p IR guided biopsy, results negative for malignancy.
Repeat PET showing the sacral mass increasing in size
She has urinary incontinence likely Mass effect.
Plan for XLAP tumor debulking.

Estimated Blood Loss: Estimated 250 mL

Operative findings: Large necrotic pelvic mass in the pre sacral space invading the entire vagina and the posterior wall of the bladder encasing both ureters. Frozen section confirmed mesenchymal tumor likely uterine origin. Extensive small bowel adhesions in the abdomen and pelvis.


Procedure Details:
After obtaining and verifying informed consent, time out was completed to verify correct patient procedure and site. General anesthesia was administered and noted to be adequate. Patient was then prepared and draped in the usual sterile fashion in the dorsal lithotomy position in the yellowfin stirrups with her arms carefully padded on arm boards, careful attention paid not to hyperextend her arms. A foley catheter was placed. Attention was turned to the abdominal portion of the procedure. A vertical skin incision was then made with a scalpel beginning at the pubic symphysis and continuing to above the umbilicus. The underlying subcutaneous tissue was opened with the Bovie and the fascia incised in the midline with the Bovie. The peritoneum was visibly evident and entered. The incision was then continued superiorly and inferiorly with the Bovie with good visualization of bowel and bladder. The Bookwalter retractor was then placed at this time with careful attention to retractor placement. The small bowel was packed out of the pelvis and the pelvic mass was visualized. The mass invading the posterior part of the bladder and entire vagina.

The right round ligament was suture ligated with 0 vicryl suture. The right retroperitoneal space was entered and the ureter was identified in the retroperitoneal space. The left retroperitoneal space was then entered, and the ureter was identified in the retroperitoneal space and a window was created below the IP ligament and above the ureter. A vessel loop was applied to the left ureter. Bilateral ureterolysis were performed to the course of the ureters in the pelvis.

Biopsy from necrotic mass confirmed mesenchymal malignancy likely from uterus. The mass was encasing both ureters and decision was made for radical vaginectomy and cystectomy to debulk the disease.

Extensive small bowel adhesions with Dr. X yo release the bowel from the pelvis.

The bowel was then packed out of the pelvis for initiation of the exenterated portion of the procedure. The iliac vessels as well as the ureters were well visualized bilaterally. The paravesical spaces were opened bilaterally and bilateral ureterolysis was
completed beginning near the bifurcation of the iliac vessels and continuing to
approximately 3 cm above the bladder. The ureters were freed laterally as well
as inferiorly. The space of Retzius was entered anteriorly as the bladder was identified. The
space was entered with the Bovie and the plane developed just below the level
of the pubic symphysis. The specimen was then freed anteriorly using the
ligasure instrument. Additional lateral attachments abutting the pelvic
sidewall were taken down using the LigaSure instrument as well. The lateral edges of the pelvic sidewall were entered with the Bovie to identify the margin of the tumor from the abdominal approach. The attachments were taken down laterally using the LigaSure instrument. the dissection was continued more laterally to abut the left pelvic sidewall at the level of the bone itself. The ureters were then tied of distally then incised distal to the suture with Metzenbaum scissors.

The specimen including pelvic mass, vagina, bladder, distal ureters and urethra were sent for pathology.

There was a large right external iliac pelvic lymph node dissection was then performed in the usual manner. The borders were as follows: Medial border was the ureter and the superior vesicle artery, lateral border was the genitofemoral nerve along the psoas muscle, the cephalad border was lower common iliac nodes, the caudad border was the superficial circumflex iliac vein, the deep border was the obturator nerve within the obturator space. Excellent hemostasis was appreciated on completion of the bilateral nodal dissection.

Omental adhesions to the pelvis. The omentum was then removed in an infracolic fashion with blunt, sharp, bovie and Ligasure cautery. No significant thickening or tumor nodularity was noted within the omentum. The site of the omentectomy and its pedicles were examined and noted to be hemostatic.

All remaining laps were then removed from the abdomen and the pelvis was copiously irrigated and cleared with saline.

The small bowel was then examined in its entirety beginning at the ileocecal junction and continuing to the ligament of Treitz and noted to be without evidence of disease or trauma.

The colon was also examined from the ileocecal junction through the sigmoid colon and the rectum and noted to be without evidence of trauma or disease. The bowel was then returned to its native confirmation. All retractors were removed at this time.

The fascia was then closed with #1 PDS loop x2 in a running fashion. The subcutaneous tissue was irrigated and cleared of all clots and debris and the skin was then closed with staples and a sterile dressing was then applied.
The patient tolerated the procedure well without complications.

Sponge, lap, instrument and needle counts were correct x2. The patient did receive antibiotics which were re-dosed appropriately intraoperatively.

By the end of the procedure there was no evidence of any gross residual disease in the abdomen and pelvis and no evidence of any injuries to any organs in the abdomen and pelvis.

Thanks so much for your help. :)
 
Hi Maria, it would be good if you let us know what CPT codes you have come up with first.
 
Hello Meg, The only code we kept looking at was 58240. This code includes a TAH, but pt has had hysterectomy. So of course, this code would need a modifier 52.
Then we thought about breaking out each individual procedure, checking for bundling and going that way. But I was not sure about that.

Thank you so much for any help.
 
58240 Pelvic exenteration for gynecologic malignancy, with total abdominal hysterectomy or cervicectomy, with or without removal of tube(s), with or without removal of ovary(s), with removal of bladder and ureteral transplantations, and/or abdominoperineal resection of rectum and colon and colostomy, or any combination thereof
My initial impression is I would likely code this 58240-52.
I'm unclear what the correct cytectomy CPT would be here. I would discuss it with my physician to better understand, and ask for amendment if needed. I don't know if I'm unclear because my clinical knowledge isn't strong enough, or there is something missing in the op note. Once I determined that code, I would run my options through an encoder to see about NCCI edits, which would make my final determination.

Either way, this is a complicated case and you will likely need to submit records and additional information.

SGO and ACOG are both great resources to submit unusual questions like this to.
 
58240 Pelvic exenteration for gynecologic malignancy, with total abdominal hysterectomy or cervicectomy, with or without removal of tube(s), with or without removal of ovary(s), with removal of bladder and ureteral transplantations, and/or abdominoperineal resection of rectum and colon and colostomy, or any combination thereof
My initial impression is I would likely code this 58240-52.
I'm unclear what the correct cytectomy CPT would be here. I would discuss it with my physician to better understand, and ask for amendment if needed. I don't know if I'm unclear because my clinical knowledge isn't strong enough, or there is something missing in the op note. Once I determined that code, I would run my options through an encoder to see about NCCI edits, which would make my final determination.

Either way, this is a complicated case and you will likely need to submit records and additional information.

SGO and ACOG are both great resources to submit unusual questions like this to.
Hi Christine,
I have a similar case that I am hoping for some opinions. I don't want to copy the OP note as it's so long so hopefully my explanation will suffice.

As per OP note procedure performed:
Procedure:
1. Total pelvic exenteration with resection of the bladder and bladder fistula and residual sigmoid and rectum to the level of the fistula
2. Ileal conduit construction for urinary diversion.
3. Omental J flap using the left gastroepiploic vessels

The issue is that the pt also had a previous hysterectomy so we are forced to use 58240-52, however the surgery was 12 hours long and, rightly so, the provider wants to use mod 22 for both the complexity and time but using 52 and 22 together are contradictory. Also, we are not able to bill for 50820 Ureteroileal conduit as it is included in 58240. Do you have any recommendations? At this point I am reduced to 58240-52 & 49905 and of course want to be able to find a way to bill for her additional time and very complex surgery.

Thank you for any guidance.
Tina
 
Hi Christine,
I have a similar case that I am hoping for some opinions. I don't want to copy the OP note as it's so long so hopefully my explanation will suffice.

As per OP note procedure performed:
Procedure:
1. Total pelvic exenteration with resection of the bladder and bladder fistula and residual sigmoid and rectum to the level of the fistula
2. Ileal conduit construction for urinary diversion.
3. Omental J flap using the left gastroepiploic vessels

The issue is that the pt also had a previous hysterectomy so we are forced to use 58240-52, however the surgery was 12 hours long and, rightly so, the provider wants to use mod 22 for both the complexity and time but using 52 and 22 together are contradictory. Also, we are not able to bill for 50820 Ureteroileal conduit as it is included in 58240. Do you have any recommendations? At this point I am reduced to 58240-52 & 49905 and of course want to be able to find a way to bill for her additional time and very complex surgery.

Thank you for any guidance.
Tina
So I think you need to think outside the box here and pretty much stop looking for an exent code that matches. Without seeing the op note, I don't think 51597 is a viable option for this surgery. Since we don't have the op note to look at the details, this is just some food for thought. The gyn portion is gone from code 58240 and it should not be reported at all in my opinion. The term exenteration refers to removing all affected organs. In this case it appears that the bladder was removed and the sigmoid and rectum below the fistula were removed. And the omental flap was used to provide a covering for the anastomosis? At any rate, there are other codes for procedures you and your provider should look at that singly or in combination might better capture the surgery (barring CCI edits of course).

51596: Cystectomy, complete, with continent diversion, any open technique, using any segment of small and/or large intestine to construct neobladder

51590: Cystectomy, complete, with ureteroileal conduit or sigmoid bladder, including intestine anastomosis;

44661: Closure of enterovesical fistula; with intestine and/or bladder resection (just a guess because the type of fistula is not specified above - it could be a rectovesical fistula so also look at 45800-45825)

50820: Ureteroileal conduit (ileal bladder), including intestine anastomosis (Bricker operation) -- but note you could not bill this code with 51596 or 51590

49905: Omental flap, intra-abdominal (List separately in addition to code for primary procedure) -- This procedure can be billed in addition no matter which other combination codes you choose.

Note to Christine: If you want to jump in here please do so. I know anatomy, but without seeing the complete description in the op note these are my best alternatives. What do you think?
 
So I think you need to think outside the box here and pretty much stop looking for an exent code that matches. Without seeing the op note, I don't think 51597 is a viable option for this surgery. Since we don't have the op note to look at the details, this is just some food for thought. The gyn portion is gone from code 58240 and it should not be reported at all in my opinion. The term exenteration refers to removing all affected organs. In this case it appears that the bladder was removed and the sigmoid and rectum below the fistula were removed. And the omental flap was used to provide a covering for the anastomosis? At any rate, there are other codes for procedures you and your provider should look at that singly or in combination might better capture the surgery (barring CCI edits of course).

51596: Cystectomy, complete, with continent diversion, any open technique, using any segment of small and/or large intestine to construct neobladder

51590: Cystectomy, complete, with ureteroileal conduit or sigmoid bladder, including intestine anastomosis;

44661: Closure of enterovesical fistula; with intestine and/or bladder resection (just a guess because the type of fistula is not specified above - it could be a rectovesical fistula so also look at 45800-45825)

50820: Ureteroileal conduit (ileal bladder), including intestine anastomosis (Bricker operation) -- but note you could not bill this code with 51596 or 51590

49905: Omental flap, intra-abdominal (List separately in addition to code for primary procedure) -- This procedure can be billed in addition no matter which other combination codes you choose.

Note to Christine: If you want to jump in here please do so. I know anatomy, but without seeing the complete description in the op note these are my best alternatives. What do you think?
I did get a response from ACOG after sending them the OP report I will copy here and then I will copy the OP report if either you or @csperoni have time to review. It is very lengthy so I appreciate any time you can give. Also the surgeon is also thinking maybe we should be billing for a total vaginectomy 57110.

ACOG RESPONSE:
This email is in response to your coding question: Pelvic exenteration after prior hysterectomy.
We fully agree that this case was far more complex than the typical performance of CPT code 58240 and 49905. According to the CMS-1784-F Work Time report, the median time for CPT code 58240 is 420 minutes (7 hours). Therefore, this procedure of 12 hours far exceeds the typical median time.

Unfortunately, the only code available to describe this work is CPT code 58240-it is the only code that allows the reporting of exenteration associated with a gynecologic malignancy. However, the 52 modifier must be used because the only required portion of the code (total abdominal hysterectomy) was not performed.

As a result, you have two options in reporting this service:
" Report 58240-52 and 49905, with an accompanying letter explaining the circumstances and requesting appropriate payment, commensurate with the work performed, OR
" Report 58999 Unlisted procedure, female genital system (nonobstetrical) and 49905. The use of the unlisted code allows the opportunity to report the work that was done without using a code that includes a total abdominal hysterectomy.

It is not certain as to which approach will achieve the best result. We recommend that you make your selection based on your knowledge of and experience with the particular payer involved.

OP report - ATTACHED AS OVER THE CHARACTER COUNT - I HOPE THAT WORKS
 

Attachments

  • Gyn Onc Pelvic Exenteration.pdf
    70.4 KB · Views: 2
Last edited:
My opinion here is 58240-52 just does not accurately capture the amount of work done. Since that is the closest code-wise, unlisted would be your best option here to receive fair compensation (along with 49905). So I agree with option 2 presented by ACOG. Due to the time involved, I would compare unlisted 58999 to 150% of 58240.
 
Top