Coding Tip: New Technology ICD-10-PCS Section “X” Drugs for FY2019
This Coding Tip was updated on 12/4/2018
RHIA, CDIP, CCS, CCS‑P, CIRCC
Executive Director Of Education
AHIMA‑Approved ICD‑10‑CM/PCS Trainer and Ambassador
Section “X” is a separate place within ICD-10-PCS for certain new technology procedures (such as new technology drugs). Section “X” does not introduce any new coding concepts or unusual guidelines for correct coding and maintains continuity with the other sections in ICD-10-PCS. The same root operation and body part values are used in section “X” as in other sections. The seventh character in section “X” is used to indicate the new technology group. This is a number or letter that changes each year that new technology codes are added. It is only used to indicate the year the code was created and all codes for that update year will have the same qualifier. The new technology drugs for FY2019 will have the qualifier/seventh character of “4” since this is the third year of ICD-10-PCS.
Section “X” codes are standalone codes. No additional codes from other sections in ICD-10-PCS are necessary for reporting as the specific procedure is described in the code title from section “X”.
New Technology section codes are easily found by looking in the ICD-10-PCS Index or the Tables. The name of the new technology device, substance or technology for a section “X” code is included as the main term. They are also listed under the main term “New Technology”.
New technology items have a new technology payment that is made in addition to the DRG payment for hospital inpatients. Missing new technology codes is a frequent error made by coders. Coders must familiarize themselves with the new technologies of each year.
There are several substance values continuing in the code table XW0 (anatomical regions, introduction) for FY2019.
- A—Bezlotoxumab Monoclonal Antibody/ZINPLAVA™ (XW033A3, XW043A3) The maximum a hospital can received for this is $1,900 as new technology payment.
- B—Cytarabine and Daunorubicin Liposome Antineoplastic/VYXEOS™ (XW033B3, XW043B3) The maximum the hospital can receive for this is $36,425 as a new technology payment.
- C—Engineered Autologous Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-Cell Immunotherapy/KTE-C19/axicabtagene ciloleucel/CAR-T therapy (XW033C3, XW043C3) The maximum payment a hospital can receive for this is $186,500 as a new technology payment
- F—Ustekinumab/STELARA™ (XW033F3, XW043F3) The maximum the hospital can receive for this is $2,400 as a new technology payment.
- 9—Defibrotide sodium/DIFETELIO® (XW03392, XW04392) The maximum the hospital can receive for this is $80,500 as a new technology payment.
There were five new substance values added to the code table XW0 (anatomical regions, introduction) for FY 2019.
- C—Axicabtagene Ciloleucel/YESCARTA™ and Tisagenlecleucel/KYMRIAH (XW033C3, XW043C3) These are two new CAR T therapies for FY2019. The maximum payment a hospital can receive for this is $186,500 as a new technology payment
- G—Plazonmicin/ZEMDRI™ (XW033G4, XZW043G4) The maximum a hospital can receive for this is $2,722.50 as a new technology payment.
- H—GIAPREZA™ (XW033H4, XW043H4) The maximum payment a hospital can receive for this is $1,500 as a new technology payment.
- D—Meropenem-vaborbactam/VABOMERE™ (XW033F3, XW043F3 – there is no unique code for VABOMERE) For FY 2019, cases “eligible for the FY 2019 new technology add-on payments will be identified by the NDC of 65293-009-01 (VABOMERE™ Meropenem-Vaborbactam Vial). Providers must code the NDC in data element LIN03 of the 837i Health Care Claim Institutional form in order to receive the new technology add-on payment for procedures involving the use of VABOMERE™” The maximum payment a hospital can receive for this is $5,544 as a new technology payment.
- 7—Andexanet alfa/AndexXa™ (XW03372, XW04372) AndexXa is a newer form of Andexanet Alfa. The maximum payment a hospital can receive for this is $14,062.50 as a new technology payment.
New Technology Drugs for 2018 – 2019
AndexXa™ (Andexanet alfa) is an antidote used to treat patients who are receiving treatment with an oral Factor Xa inhibitor who suffer a major bleeding episode and require urgent reversal of direct and indirect Factor Xa anticoagulation. Patients at high risk for thrombosis, including those who have been diagnosed with atrial fibrillation (AF) and venous thrombosis (VTE), typically receive treatment using long-term oral anticoagulation agents.
Axicabtagene Ciloleucel (YESCARTA™) and Tisagenlecleucel (KYMRIAH™). (Fights non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma and Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia) For these CAR T-Cell therapies. Both are given IV.
Bezlotoxumab (ZINPLAVA™) —this drug is used in patients with Clostridium difficile (C. diff) diarrhea who are already on antibiotics and have a high risk of recurrence. Up to 25% of patients with C. diff will have a recurrence of the bacteria. Use of this drug helps to reduce recurrence of the bacteria. This drug is a human monoclonal antibody targeting the C. diff toxin B and does not affect the GI microbiota like the antibacterial drugs do. This drug is administered by IV.
Cytarabine/ and Daunorubicin (VYXEOS™)—this drug is used in patients with newly diagnosed therapy related acute myeloid leukemia (t-AML) or AML. VYXEOS delivers and maintains fixed ratios of Cytarabine and Daunorubicin and provides prolonged exposure in the bone marrow. Both Cytarabine and Daunorubicin are existing chemotherapy drugs and are commonly used but VYXEOS is a specific formula of the two drugs. This is administered by IV.
Defibrotide sodium (DEFITELIO®) is treatment for patients diagnosed with hepatic veno-occlusive disease (VOD) with evidence of multiorgan dysfunction. Also known as sinusoidal obstruction syndrome. This is a life threatening complication of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). Treatment is 25 mg/day for 21 + days.
Engineered Autologous Chimeric Antigen Receptor T-Cell Immunotherapy/KTE-C19/axicabtagene ciloleucel/CAR-T therapy—this engineered autologous immunotherapy is used to treat patients with relapsed or refractory B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma who are eligible for an autologous stem cell transplant. This represents a new paradigm in antineoplastic therapy. In this, the patient’s own T-cells are harvested and engineered to target specific antigens. After this is infused back into the patient, the genetically engineered T-cells find the target cells and kill them.
GIAPREZA™ a synthetic human angiotensin II, is administered through IV infusion to raise blood pressure in adult patients who have been diagnosed with septic or other distributive shock.
Neropenem-vaborbactam (VABOMERE™) Given IV for adults with complicated UTIs and acute pyelonephritis (chills, rigors, temp higher than 38C, WBC over 10,000, etc.)
Plazonmicin (ZEMDRI™) Next generation aminoglycoside antibiotic to treat multi-drug resistant gram-negative bacteria, usually complicated UTI (cUTI) or pyelonephritis. It is given IV.
Ustekinumab (STELARA™) is an IV infusion treatment for Crohn’s disease. Only for use in patients over 18 with moderately to severely active Crohn’s disease.
AHA ICD-10-CM/PCS Coding Clinic, Fourth Quarter 2018 Page 56
The information contained in this post is valid at the time of posting. Viewers are encouraged to research subsequent official guidance in the areas associated with the topic as they can change rapidly.
The question asked in a physician query may be the most important element of the document. Query questions need to be as simple and concise as possible. The physician should have no doubt what the coder is asking.
Coding complications of transplanted organs has always been a coding dilemma. With the implementation of ICD-10-CM that didn’t change. However, coders have multiple directives to help in determining what a complication of the transplant is vs. non-transplant conditions and diseases.
We interviewed our most productive coders, reviewers and members of our education team, asking them what steps they take to find a rhythm that works for them. This week, we talked with Beth Martilik, MA, RHIA, CDIP, CCS, Assistant Director of Education, about the steps she takes to find her routine.
With the implementation of ICD-10-CM came more codes for reporting many different conditions and diseases, and atrial fibrillation is one of those. For many years there was only one code available for reporting this condition, even when the physician further specified the type of atrial fibrillation that the patient had. In ICD-10-CM, there are four codes to report atrial fibrillation.
We have a case where the physician removes mucoid casts found during bronchoscopy. We have also seen mucus plugs removed during bronchoscopy. The MD performs bronchial washings then removes a large amount of tenacious and thick mucoid casts via bronchoscopy. Is this coded drainage, extirpation or excision? What body part is used?
The key to making the query process more efficient is to look for words or documentation while reviewing the record that may signal a potential query opportunity and to note the finding at that time. By the time a coder reaches the end of a record, documentation may have been found to eliminate the need for the query.
Question: This patient is noted to have “Lymphangitic carcinomatosis of lungs with mediastinal lymph nodes.” How would I code the diagnosis? Would I code metastatic cancer to the lung (C78.01) or metastatic cancer to the lymph nodes (C77.1)?
Coding these can be challenging for coders when trying to decipher the operative notes and terms that are used. The physicians are still using the terms excision and resection interchangeably and review of the entire operative note is required to select the appropriate root operation. Remember, it is the coder’s responsibility to determine the root operation based on the details from the physician in the operative report.
This would be considered a “mechanical” complication of the stent graft since the MD states it is a fracture of the endograft and it is folded over on itself. I would change T82.898A TO T82.598A for Other mechanical complication of other cardiac and vascular devices and implants, initial encounter. I did not use “displacement” because the surgeon did not state that the graft was displaced, only that it collapsed upon itself causing obstruction.
We interviewed our most productive coders and reviewers, asking them what steps they take to find a rhythm that works for them. This week, we talked with Valerie Abney, CDIP, RHIT, CCS, about the steps she takes to find her routine.
Osteoporosis alone is responsible for over a million fractures every year. Stress fractures are not as common but they do occur. There are more than 1 million total joint replacements in the U.S. each year, so there was a need to create codes for injuries that occur around or near the prosthesis. These are called “periprosthetic” fractures.
Back in April, the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) published a report detailing its findings from a review of two groups of high-risk diagnosis codes, acute stroke and major depressive disorder. The objective was to determine whether selected diagnosis codes submitted to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services for use in CMS’s risk adjustment program complied with Federal requirements.
There seems to be differences of opinions on the issue of a 40w0day gestation Can you clarify if P08.21 should be assigned for 40w0day infant or if it would not be assigned unless the infant’s gestation age was 40w1day or greater?
Coders may find situations where a patient is documented as meeting SIRS or sepsis criteria, or has some clinical indicators reflective of possible sepsis, but the physician never documents sepsis as a diagnosis. Should the coder always query for sepsis in these instances?
In this example, would it be appropriate to code the complication code T82.03XA, Leakage of heart valve prosthesis, initial encounter as the principal diagnosis over the HFpEF (heart failure exacerbation) code?
We interviewed our most productive coders and reviewers, asking them what steps they take to find a rhythm that works for them. This week, we talked with Kerry Atkins, CDIP, CCS‑P, COC, CPC, CPCO, CPMA, CEMC, COBGC, RMB, Physician Services Consultant at HIA, about the steps she takes to find her routine.
A higher CMI corresponds to increased consumption of resources and increased cost of patient care, resulting in increased reimbursement to the facility from government and private payers, like CMS. We know that documentation directly impacts coding.
With the implementation of ICD-10-PCS more codes were developed in order to accurately report procedures. Spinal fusion coding is still a problematic coding issue and at times, even a coder’s nightmare. Coders often report only the code for the fusion thinking that one code would include all of the other procedures that are performed.
Answer: I would code 0HPT0NZ for removal of tissue expander from right breast, open and change 0HPT0JZ, removal of synthetic substitute from right breast, open, for removal of the acellular dermal matrix to 0HPT0KZ, Removal of nonautologous tissue substitute from right breast, open approach.
There are certain conditions that have instructional notes in the ICD-10-CM tabular/coding conventions that guide the coder in sequencing. This is especially true when the condition has a common manifestation or underlying conditions of a chronic disease. If there is a “code first” note in the tabular, the coder should follow this instruction and sequence the underlying etiology or chronic condition first followed by the manifestation as an additional diagnosis.
When it comes to coding and documentation, finding your own rhythm can lead to positive results. For our series, Find Your Routine, we interviewed our most productive coders and reviewers and asked them what steps they take to find a rhythm that works for them. This week, we talked with Meghan Schumacher, CPC, CPMA, Provider Coding Consultant at Health Information Associates, Inc., about the steps she takes to find her routine.
Last year, the Office of Inspector General (OIG) performed an investigation that found, “between 2014 and 2016, Medicare Advantage organizations overturned 75% of their preauthorization and payment denials upon appeal,” which is why, at HIA, we always advise our clients to engage in the appeals process.
There may be instances where a coder will suspect the patient has acute kidney injury (AKI), but the physician has failed to document the diagnosis. In another scenario, the physician may have made the diagnosis, but there is a question of clinical validity. In either case, a query would be justified.
How many times have you heard “it only takes one code to get the claim paid”? With the emphasis on the severity of illness and the move toward value-based reimbursement in today’s healthcare climate, it is more important than ever for coders to report all applicable diagnoses. There are three important pieces: what the provider documents, how to the coder interprets that documentation and codes it, and then how it is extrapolated.
The reimbursement landscape is already a complicated one – and the highly-complex claims denials process only adds fuel to the fire. A denied claim is one that has been determined by a payor to be in appropriate. Once a coding specialist amends the errors on a rejected claim, they can resubmit it for consideration. The time-intensive process has a significant impact on the cash flow for any setting in the healthcare environment. They are also very costly to appeal.
When a practitioner documents a diagnosis that does not appear to be supported by the clinical indicators in the health record, a coder has four choices: (1) Code the diagnosis; (2) Ignore the diagnosis; (3) Generate a query to confirm clinical validation of a diagnosis; (4) Follow the facility’s escalation policy for clinical validation.
A California-based healthcare services provider and several of its affiliates have agreed to pay $30 million to resolve allegations they submitted inaccurate information about the health status of beneficiaries enrolled in Medicare Advantage Plans, according to the Department of Justice.
Happy National Volunteer Week! This week we celebrate the impact volunteer work has on building stronger communities. We know that our staff have a positive impact while they’re on the job, and we are proud to share a few ways our #PeopleBehindTheNumbers are taking time to volunteer in their own local communities.
Scrutiny of coding compliance in the growing ambulatory surgical center (ASC) market has increased in recent years from both Medicare and private payers. This will only increase as the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) moves towards value-based care.