Results 1 to 4 of 4

27090 vs 27091

  1. #1
    Smile 27090 vs 27091
    Medical Coding Books
    How would you answer this? What is the difference between 27091 and 27090 and what are the applications when each one should be used?

  2. #2
    Location
    Nashville AAPC Chapter
    Posts
    937
    Default
    27090 Procedure Description:
    The patient is placed in a lateral decubitus position (lying on the side). The physician may access the prosthesis through the previous hip surgery incision. The physician exposes and incises the hip joint capsule. The hip is manually dislocated. Any scar tissue is removed. The physician disimpacts the femoral prosthesis, removing cement as needed. The physician repairs the incision in layers with sutures.

    27091 Procedure Description:
    The patient is placed in a lateral decubitus position (lying on the side). The physician may access the prosthesis through the previous hip surgery incision. Any scar tissue is resected. The physician exposes and incises the hip joint capsule. The hip is manually dislocated. Methylmethacrylate (cement) is removed from the upper portion of the stem. The physician removes the stem with forceful blows. The physician removes any cement. The physician may make a bone window in the femoral cortex to remove additional cement. If there is bony ingrowth, flexible osteotomes may be used to remove the bone, allowing further stem retraction. The physician removes cement from the border of the implant with chisels and gouges. The physician removes the acetabular components with instruments. Any remaining loose cement is removed with a large curette or other instrument. A spacer of methylmethacrylate formed into a cube shape may be inserted into the space between the femur and tibia. The spacer prevents the soft tissues from compressing the joint space. The spacer is secured until another prosthesis is inserted. Drains may be placed. The wound may be left open for healing or the incision is repaired in layers.

  3. #3
    Smile Thank You
    Thank You. Sometimes I overthink and make things more confusing. I really appreciate your help.

  4. #4
    Question Still Confused
    I don't know why I am having such a problem with this. My Dr. coded this with 27090 w/a modifier 22. Do you think CPT 27091 would be appropriate? Thank you for your help. I REALLY appreciate it.

    "We started by excising the old incision at the proximal end. It curved posterolaterally over her buttock. This was where the sinus tract had developed and it was excised. Full thickness slices were developed.
    Distally the fascia was separated from the vastus lateralis proximally. It was very difficult and was one mass and so it was taken through a longitudinal incision and elevated it up off the femur distally and the
    ileum proximally, as well as, construct. Having dissection planes created, dissection was then carried out. The anterior brim of the pelvis was identified and a cobra retractor was placed and then later a Homan
    retractor was placed into the superior ileum to gain exposure. The cup itself was loose. There was radiolucency around it on the x-ray. It had gross mobility but was mechanically locked within a few millimeters of its position with an osteotome and a large amount of the cement around it was removed and with Moreland cup remover, the remainder was removed. The stem itself appeared to be Striker design so the proximal body was removed from the stem. We then turned our attention back to the acetabulum. Several pendulum wedges were identified. Most were covered in cement and difficult to access. Some were removed en bloc with the cement they were attached to. As best I could tell, only two maybe three were attached to bone but did not have any type of fixation other than the screw. We were able to use the drills and drill the cement out of the screw hole and then use the standard 3.5 drill bit to remove the screw and the blocks themselves were removed. After removing all excess cement, thorough debridement with a
    Midas Rex was carried out and we identified the areas of living bone. It was overall very sclerotic and hard, but there were areas of punctate bleeding. Having done a thorough debridement, the pubis and ischium were palpated. There was a large gap that was potentially amenable to gap reconstruction in the future with possibly a seven graft type as described by Paprosky. Once this was done, the stem was fully porous coated and had excellent radiographic end growth. There was some cement from about 1 to 2 centimeters around the proximal ring. It was unclear the purpose of this cement. It was removed with an osteotome and access to the bony surface was identified and excellent on growth and end growth was confirmed. As
    this was fully porous coated, it was about 120 to 125 in length. Given that, the only way to use the proximal end to remove the device would be to split the femur. This would require additional hardware placement which may preclude clearing of her infection; therefore, the end of the device was removed with a Midas Rex wheel taking care to protect the soft tissues from metal debris with lap sponges. Once this was done, the immediate interface between the porous coated stem and the bone was disrupted with a
    Midas Rex side cutting bit circumferentially for as best we could for the depth of the bit. We then passed what appeared to be a 13 mm stem so we initially passed a 13 mm trephine over it, but expected that it would eventually bind up and then we went to the 14 mm trephine and with quite a bit of effort, we were able to get down to the tip and remove it without splitting the femur and preserving a majority of the bone. The tip of the device had very solid attachment to the anterior cortex and removed with the device was a small piece of cortical bone with muscle attached to it that was from this location but no disruption of the continuity of the femoral shaft occurred. We then irrigated with 6 liters of antibiotic solution followed by Betadine and Peroxide followed by irrigation with an additional 6 liters."
    Last edited by cgrif2; 10-06-2014 at 01:07 PM. Reason: Left out operative report

Similar Threads

  1. 11983 or 27091?? help!
    By Carrie.Barse@sanfordhealth.org in forum Orthopaedics
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-27-2013, 08:50 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Enjoying Our Forums?

AAPC forums are a benefit of membership. Joining AAPC grants you unlimited access, allowing you to post questions and participate with our community of over 150,000 professionals.

Join Now Continue Reading Without Full Access

Already a Member?

Login

Close Message

In addition to full participation on AAPC forums, as a member you will be able to:

  • Access to the largest healthcare job database in the world.
  • Join over 150,000 members of the healthcare network in the world.
  • Be a part of an industry leading organization that drives the business side of healthcare.
  • Save anywhere from 10%-50% with exclusive member discounts on courses, books, study materials, and conferences.
  • Access to discounts at hundreds of restaurants, travel destinations, retail stores, and service providers. AAPC members also have opportunities to save on heath, life, and liability insurance.
  • Become a member of a local chapter and attend regular meetings.