Guidelines 2.l.2) states: "The primary malignancy is coded as an additional site" . I interpret this to mean the primary site code is always added to the encounter, that you should not bill mets sites without identifying the primary cancer. For instance: prostate cancer that has metastasized to the bones and the treatment is directed toward the bones. I would code this as 79.51, C61--never as just C79.51. I believe the primary code is necessary because it identifies the cellular structure of the cancer being targeted for treatment. Am I correct in this understanding of this Guideline?
-
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ & read the forum rules. To view all forums, post or create a new thread, you must be an AAPC Member. If you are a member and have already registered for member area and forum access, you can log in by clicking here. If you've forgotten the password it can be reset on our sign in section by entering your registered Email Address or Username here. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below..
Wiki Necessity of adding primary site cancer code when mets site is being treated
- Thread starter dmcdowell
- Start date
mitchellde
True Blue
Yes this has always been the correct way. In addition if the primary site is unknown then you use the code for unknown primary.