SPECIMENS: Right posterior neck mass.
BRIEF OPERATIVE FINDINGS: Right posterior neck mass, 1.5 cm, completely excised.
INDICATIONS FOR PROCEDURE: seven-year-old male who presented for evaluation of a right posterior neck mass. This has been present for several years, intermittently enlarging and getting painful and tender. Exam was consistent with a neck mass, approximately 1 cm in size, in the subcutaneous/dermal planes. Ultrasound confirmed this lesion. Therefore, due to the patient’s chronic nature, the intermittent pain and discomfort, excisional biopsy was recommended to the family. The risks and benefits of this were discussed, which include, but are not limited to bleeding, infection, damage to local tissue, as well as anesthesia, and they elected to proceed.
OPERATIVE PROCEDURE IN DETAIL:
The patient's bed was then rotated 90 degrees, and he was positioned for surgery. The right neck was facing out. Palpation of the right superior posterior neck demonstrated an approximately 1.5 cm firm mass associated with the subcutaneous plane and dermal layers. It was mobile in nature.
An elliptical incision was planned around the immediate skin edges and marked. This was infiltrated with 1% lidocaine with 1:1000 epinephrine solution. He was then prepped and draped in sterile fashion using ChloraPrep solution.
An elliptical incision was then performed, approximately 2 cm in total length. In the immediate subcutaneous plane, dissection was carried out with elevation of minor flaps. The lesion was then identified and dissection was then carried in a circumferential fashion along the posterior aspect of the mass without difficulty. It was noted to be adherent to some of the subcutaneous muscle, however, not infiltrative in nature. The specimen was placed in saline and then later formalin for a permanent pathologic evaluation
I billed 21555 because he totally excised the mass
Doc billed what was scheduled 21550 biopsy
my problem is biopsy is part of a lesion for diagnostic evaluation and pathology.
doc excised all the mass and said in his finding completely excised.. I need official docs saying that just because of the intent of the procedure isn't always what was done. other wise alot of docs would be out of some potential revenue....
any other opinions or help would be appreciated.
BRIEF OPERATIVE FINDINGS: Right posterior neck mass, 1.5 cm, completely excised.
INDICATIONS FOR PROCEDURE: seven-year-old male who presented for evaluation of a right posterior neck mass. This has been present for several years, intermittently enlarging and getting painful and tender. Exam was consistent with a neck mass, approximately 1 cm in size, in the subcutaneous/dermal planes. Ultrasound confirmed this lesion. Therefore, due to the patient’s chronic nature, the intermittent pain and discomfort, excisional biopsy was recommended to the family. The risks and benefits of this were discussed, which include, but are not limited to bleeding, infection, damage to local tissue, as well as anesthesia, and they elected to proceed.
OPERATIVE PROCEDURE IN DETAIL:
The patient's bed was then rotated 90 degrees, and he was positioned for surgery. The right neck was facing out. Palpation of the right superior posterior neck demonstrated an approximately 1.5 cm firm mass associated with the subcutaneous plane and dermal layers. It was mobile in nature.
An elliptical incision was planned around the immediate skin edges and marked. This was infiltrated with 1% lidocaine with 1:1000 epinephrine solution. He was then prepped and draped in sterile fashion using ChloraPrep solution.
An elliptical incision was then performed, approximately 2 cm in total length. In the immediate subcutaneous plane, dissection was carried out with elevation of minor flaps. The lesion was then identified and dissection was then carried in a circumferential fashion along the posterior aspect of the mass without difficulty. It was noted to be adherent to some of the subcutaneous muscle, however, not infiltrative in nature. The specimen was placed in saline and then later formalin for a permanent pathologic evaluation
I billed 21555 because he totally excised the mass
Doc billed what was scheduled 21550 biopsy
my problem is biopsy is part of a lesion for diagnostic evaluation and pathology.
doc excised all the mass and said in his finding completely excised.. I need official docs saying that just because of the intent of the procedure isn't always what was done. other wise alot of docs would be out of some potential revenue....
any other opinions or help would be appreciated.