Coder Q&A with Pat Macc: Principal Dx Selection
RHIA, CDIP, CCS, CCS‑P, CIRCC
Executive Director Of Education
AHIMA‑Approved ICD‑10‑CM/PCS Trainer and Ambassador
This coder has a question about choosing the principal diagnosis in this case.
Per the medical record notes this patient presented due to CHF exacerbation. It was noted she had not taken her Lasix for two weeks. The discharge summary notes CHF exacerbation due to MR due to dehiscence and leaking of prosthetic mitral valve. The patient already has a scheduled appointment for her surgery for the mitral valve prosthetic repair. Cardiology consulted and they attempted to change her surgery to be done while she was in the hospital. However, patient went home AMA to take care of some business and await original surgery.
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?
HPI: Patient is 51 year old female with s/p replacement with #31 Biocor tissue valve in Feb 2019 w/ left atrial appendage clip, with dehiscence and leaking of bioprosthetic valve with moderate to severe mitral regurgitation, scheduled for MVR on 6/7/2019, hx of HFpEF, presents with worsening SOB since last 2 days. Last 3-4 days she has progressively had noticed shortness of breath on exertion, but from yesterday she is short of breath at rest. Also complains of cough with minimal expectoration, no hemoptysis. No chest pain, no swelling in feet or increase in abdominal girth no palpitations, no fever chills, No n/v/d/c No dizziness or syncope She has gained 10 lb. of weight in last 2 weeks She was not compliant with her medications, has not taken Lasix for 2 weeks. She just did not go the pharmacy to refill. No excuse for not refilling She has anxiety about the surgery next week, that may be adding up to the stress
PROBLEM: Acute Heart Failure Exacerbation – HFpEF
– MV dehiscence/leakage –> severe MR
– BNP 318
– Troponin 0.03, peaked at 0.04
– Last Echo showed LVEF 60-65%
– Reports non-compliance with Lasix and Valsartan from previous admission.
– ASA 81 mg PO daily
– Coreg 6.25 mg PO bid
– Switch Valsartan to Losartan 100 mg PO daily on discharge
PROBLEM: Moderate to Severe MR due to Mitral Valve Dehiscence with leakage
– Previously evaluated on last admission with scheduled date for MVR
– Scheduled for mitral valve replacement on 6/7
5/31/19 SUMMARY: is a 60 y.o. Female with PMH of rheumatic heart disease s/p MV replacement with #31 Biocor tissue valve 1/2019, with subsequent dehiscence of valve with leaking and moderate MR, and MVR scheduled for 6/5/19, hx of HFpEF who presented with worsening shortness of breath, previously only on exertion but now at rest. Found to have acute decompensated HFpEF heart failure.
Subjective: Shortness of breath is improved since she has been on Lasix. Patient is happy to be getting her valve replacement on 6/7.
# Heart failure exacerbation – HFpEF
Patient s/p MVR with dehiscence and leaking with severe MR, Home diuretic regimen is Lasix 40 mg,
History of noncompliance, she did not Lasix for 2 weeks,
Weight gain 10 lbs.
JVD +, no pedal edema
BNP 318, negative troponin
Received Lasix 40 mg in ED, will be given another dose of 40 mg IV
IV Lasix 40 mg bid, change to po tomorrow
Continue Coreg 6.25 mg bid
Strict ins and outs
# Recent MVR with leaking, moderate to Severe MR,
Scheduled for MVR on 6/7
Discuss with Cardiac surgery if they surgery can be done this admission,
Patient is s/p mitral valve replacement with a 31 Biocor tissue valve 1/2019.
Dehiscence of bioprosthetic valve with leaking and with moderate to severe wall-hugging eccentric periprosthetic mitral regurgitation noted.
Small mobile echogenic structure noted at the dehisced site of bioprosthetic valve which may represent suture material vs vegetation.
Systolic flow reversal was observed in the RLPV spectral doppler flow pattern.
Cardio PN 6/1
Called to bedside to speak to patient wants to go home and return for her valve replacement on 6/7 Spoke to patient about previously missed appointment and that it would be in her best interest to stay and get the surgery in house as CTS is willing to operate while in house and possibly even sooner than 6/7. Discussed the risks of leaving without having the procedure done including further decompensation and including but not limited to more serious complications including death.
Patient adamantly expresses that she has some personal business to take care of and does not want to delay those appointments and that she will take her Lasix daily and return to get her valve surgery on 6/7. Patient to leave AMA. 6/1/19
Assign the acute exacerbation of CHF (HFpEF) code I50.33, Acute on chronic diastolic (congestive) heart failure as the principal diagnosis in this case. The surgery date was already set and not performed on this admission. The patient ran out of Lasix and did not go to the pharmacy to get it (noncompliance). That is the reason she went into CHF (HFpEF) exacerbation and presented with SOB and elevated BNP on admission. She later went home AMA to come back for original surgery. In addition, assign T82.03XA, Leakage of heart valve prosthesis, initial encounter; T50.1X6A, Underdosing of loop [high-ceiling] (Lasix) diuretics, initial encounter; Z91.128, Patient’s intentional underdosing of medication regimen for other reason; and any other secondary diagnoses on the case.
We know that every case is unique. The above post is simply our opinion based on the information we have received. We encourage readers to research subsequent official guidance in the areas associated with this topic as they can change rapidly.
Severe sepsis occurs when sepsis progresses and signs of organ dysfunction/failure develop. One site stated that approximately 30% of patients with severe sepsis do not survive. Patients may develop one organ dysfunction/failure, multi-system organ failure and/or septic shock.
In Part 2 of our Sepsis Series, we are going to focus on sequencing of sepsis when the diagnosis is clearly documented. Later in the series we will look at what to do when the diagnosis is not clearly documented.
In this series, we will learn what sepsis is or causes of sepsis, how to sequence the diagnosis in ICD-10-CM, what are the clinical indicators for sepsis, is a query necessary before reporting the diagnosis of sepsis, and how to prevent denials on sepsis records.
In the previous three parts of this four part series, we discussed the new ICD-10-CM diagnosis code changes, ICD-10-PCS procedure code changes and FY2020 IPPS changes. In this last Part 4 of the series, we will review the NTAP procedure codes and reimbursement add-on payments for FY2020.
In the previous two parts of this four part series, we discussed the new ICD-10-CM diagnosis code changes and ICD-10-PC procedure code changes. In this session we will review the major IPPS changes for FY2020. On August 2, 2019, CMS published the Final Rule for IPPS (CMS-1716) FY2020 IPPS Final Rule.
In Part 1 of this 4 part series we discussed some of the new ICD-10-CM diagnosis changes. In Part 2 we present the significant ICD-10-PCS procedure code changes. There are 72,184 total ICD-10-CM codes for FY2020.
This is Part 1 of a 4 part series on the FY2020 changes to ICD-10 and the IPPS. In this part, we discuss some of the new ICD-10-CM diagnosis changes. There are 72,184 total ICD-10-CM codes for FY2020.
We have finished with the step-by-step coding tidbits on coding of spinal fusions. If you were not able to catch Parts 1-13 of this series focused on spinal fusions, please visit hiacode.com/topics/series/spinal-fusion-coding/.
In Part 12, we focused on intra-operative peripheral neuro monitoring used during spinal fusion surgery. In Part 13, we are going to focus on harvesting of autograft and is it coded. Remember in Part 6, we learned that autograft is bone from the patient.
In Part 11, we focused on identifying the computer assisted navigation used during spinal fusion surgery. In Part 12, we are going to focus on intra-operative peripheral neuro monitoring.
In Part 10, we focused on identifying whether or not hardware from a previous spinal fusion is coded. In Part 11, we are going to discuss computer assisted navigation.
In Part 9, we focused on identifying if decompression was also performed and if so, on which body part. In Part 10, we are going to focus on identifying if hardware was removed from a previous fusion site.
In Part 8, we focused on identifying if a discectomy was performed, and if so, if it was a partial or a total discectomy. In Part 9, we are going to focus on identifying if a decompression was performed, and if so, was it of the spinal cord, spinal nerves or both?
In Part 7, we focused on identifying any instrumentation that may be used during a spinal fusion. In Part 8, we are going to focus on identifying if a discectomy is performed and if this is an excision or a resection of the disc.
In Part 6, we focused on identifying the type of bone graft product used for the spinal fusion. In Part 7, we are going to focus on identifying any instrumentation or device used.
In Part 5, we focused on identifying the approach being used for the spinal fusion. In Part 6, we are going to focus on identifying the type of bone graft used for the spinal fusion.
In Part 4, we focused on determining the spinal column being fused. In Part 5, we are going to focus on identifying what approach is being used to complete the spinal fusion (anterior, posterior or both).
This past year, HIA implemented “Buddy Up,” a program designed to help the new hire have a smooth transition into their new HIA roles with the assistance of a “buddy.” What is a Buddy? The Buddy is simply a peer who can guide the new hire in order to make them feel more comfortable. We are very proud of this program and have many success stories that we would like to share. Take a look at the wonderful feedback we have received below.
In Part 3, we focused on determining the level of the fusion(s) and how to determine the number of vertebrae fused. In Part 4, we are going to focus on identifying which column is being fused (anterior, posterior or both).
Part 3: Spinal Fusion Coding — Determine the Level(s) or Region of Fusion and Number of Vertebrae Fused
In Part 1, we learned the diagnoses associated with the need for spinal fusions, and in Part 2 the need to identify if the fusion is an initial or refusion of the vertebrae. In Part 3, we are going to focus on determining the level(s) of fusion, as well as the number of vertebrae fused.
In Part 2, we are going to look at the differences between initial fusion and a refusion. In ICD-9, there were specific codes to show if the fusion was an initial fusion, or if it was a refusion. In ICD-10-PCS, initial fusions and refusion procedures are coded to the same root operation “fusion.”
This is Part 1 of a 14 part series focusing on education for spinal fusions. Spinal fusion coding is a tough job for coders. There are so many diseases/disorders that result in the need for spinal fusion, and even more choices in reporting the ICD-10-PCS codes.
The official definition from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) states that a Medicare overpayment is a payment that exceeds amounts properly payable under Medicare statutes and regulations. When Medicare identifies an overpayment, the amount becomes a debt you owe the Federal government.
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)?