- Joined
- Nov 23, 2015
- Messages
- 912
- Reaction score
- 1,538
If I was asked to review that case scenario, I would approve the biopsy.Define "field"
Is it what is directly visualized? Or is it used as another way to describe an "anatomical area"?
Let's say patient comes with great toe abscess and ulcer sub 5th metatarsal base. MRI workup demonstrate great toe osteomyelitis with questionable findings involving the fifth metatarsal base.
I bring patient to OR and perform great toe amputation and then bone biopsy of the fifth metatarsal base to determine if it is actually osteomyelitis or not. In my opinion this should be billable as the bone biopsy is being taken from a different area of the foot away from the main area of surgery.
Would love to read your thoughts on this scenario.
And as a point of clarification, if you do bill for a biopsy, it also has to be a completely different and identifiable procedure.
Performing an arthroplasty and sending the resected bone for “biopsy” is not a second procedure. You can’t bill a biopsy simply because you resected bone as part of another procedure. You can’t perform one procedure and get paid for two.
This may sound intuitive but it happens all the time.
Another example of billing for 2 procedures when really performing one is when there’s a dislocation and you perform an arthrodesis. Reduction of the dislocation is included in the arthrodesis of that joint. You need to reduce the deformity in order to align the site properly for the arthrodesis.
Remember, CCI edits and entire CPT system was created by physicians and the AMA. NCCI policy is a government policy.
So if any of these edits or rules seem “stupid”, you can blame the AMA and CMS.
Last edited: