This is giving me fits. Every seminar or crosswalk I have says to bill 92941 for every vessel treated in a acute MI case. The problem I have is that in the cpt book it clearly states that "for additional vessels treated, see 92920-92938 and 92943-92944".
So it is saying -for additional vessels treated (and they don't spell out they mean only branches or all other major arteries and branches) use any code but 92941 again.
Does anyone have any credible info as to what this means in coding interventions in acute MI cases?
My thought was that it means if any major cor.artery or it's branch was occluded (and the documentation shows this) than you can code using the 92941, but if-for example- the LAD was documented as 70% occluded and there was also a 40% stenosis in the LC-with no occlusion noted-then you would code 92941-LAD and then code the intervention done to the LC-say they stented you'd use 92928.
Occluded means blocked and stenosis means narrowing and doesn't necessarily mean blockage. Am I wrong in this understanding?
So it is saying -for additional vessels treated (and they don't spell out they mean only branches or all other major arteries and branches) use any code but 92941 again.
Does anyone have any credible info as to what this means in coding interventions in acute MI cases?
My thought was that it means if any major cor.artery or it's branch was occluded (and the documentation shows this) than you can code using the 92941, but if-for example- the LAD was documented as 70% occluded and there was also a 40% stenosis in the LC-with no occlusion noted-then you would code 92941-LAD and then code the intervention done to the LC-say they stented you'd use 92928.
Occluded means blocked and stenosis means narrowing and doesn't necessarily mean blockage. Am I wrong in this understanding?