Tip of the Week: New pacemaker CPT codes do not include pulse generator insertion
APCs Weekly Monitor, April 20, 2007
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to APCs Weekly Monitor!
Shannon McCall, RHIA, CCS, CPC, director of HIM/coding for HCPro, Inc., in Marblehead, MA, suggests the following tips when coding pacemakers:
- Distinguish between a single- and dual-chamber system. A single system is one in which the physician places a pulse generator and one electrode in either the right atrium or right ventricle. A dual-chamber system is one in which the physician places a pulse generator in the right atrium and one electrode in the right ventricle. To view an example of a single pacemaker system that MedlinePlus provides, visit http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/imagepages/19566.htm.
- Recognize that biventricular pacing is not synonymous with a dual-chamber system. Biventricular pacing occurs when a physician places an additional electrode in the left ventricle. Note that CPT inserted additional guidelines for 2007 to distinguish among biventricular pacing, single system, and dual-chamber system. To view a diagram of the heart that shows each atrium and ventricle of the heart, visit MedlinePlus' Web site at http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/imagepages/19612.htm
Consider the following two examples of biventricular pacing:
A patient with congestive heart failure presents with a previously placed single-chamber pacemaker system in the right ventricle that a physician inserted one year ago. The patient presents today for placement of a left ventricular electrode/lead to achieve biventricular pacing. Report code 33224 for this scenario.
A patient with congestive heart failure presents for an initial insertion of a single-chamber ventricular system (right ventricle) with a transvenous electrode. During the same session, the patient also undergoes a left ventricular electrode/lead placement. Report codes 33207 and 33225 for this scenario.
(Source: JustCoding.com, April 2007).
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to APCs Weekly Monitor!
Related Products
Most Popular
- Articles
-
- Q/A: Volume requirement for reporting hydration services
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- Catch up on what's new with injections and infusions
- Topic: CMS, OESS post new security compliance review information, checklist
- Capturing all necessary codes for IUD insertion and removal can be challenging
- What does case-mix index mean to you?
- QA:Coding multiple initial infusions
- News and briefs: Oklahoma Osteopathic Association against residency bill change
- HIPAA Q&A: Level of encryption needed for email
- OB services: Coding inside and outside of the package
- E-mailed
-
- Q/A: Volume requirement for reporting hydration services
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- Catch up on what's new with injections and infusions
- New conflicts of interest create new challenges
- Q/A. One injection code or two?
- What does case-mix index mean to you?
- ED-to-inpatient transfers are flawed with safety gaps
- Joint Commission Center announces handoff communication solutions
- Inside best practice: Reduce patient falls with a stoplight
- Identify modifiable risk factors to prevent patient falls
- Searched