DOCSLIB.ORG

Gallstone Disease Diagnosis and Management of Cholelithiasis, Cholecystitis and Choledocholithiasis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Gallstone Disease Diagnosis and Management of Cholelithiasis, Cholecystitis and Choledocholithiasis Internal Clinical Guidelines Team Document information (i.e. version number etc) Gallstone disease Diagnosis and management of cholelithiasis, cholecystitis and choledocholithiasis Clinical Guideline <…> Methods, evidence and recommendations 2014 Draft for Consultation National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Disclaimer Healthcare professionals are expected to take NICE clinical guidelines fully into account when exercising their clinical judgement. However, the guidance does not override the responsibility of healthcare professionals to make decisions appropriate to the circumstances of each patient, in consultation with the patient and/or their guardian or carer. Copyright National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, Date xxxx. All rights reserved. This material may be freely reproduced for educational and not-for-profit purposes within the NHS. No reproduction by or for commercial organisations is allowed without the express written permission of the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence. Gallstone disease Contents Contents 1 Overview .................................................................................................................................. 7 Patient-centred care ................................................................................................................ 7 2 Summary Section .................................................................................................................. 9 Guideline development group (GDG) members.................................................................... 9 Internal clinical guidelines team.............................................................................................. 9 Centre for Clinical Practice commissioning team................................................................ 10 Key priorities for implementation .......................................................................................... 11 Algorithm................................................................................................................................. 12 List of all recommendations .................................................................................................. 13 Research recommendations ................................................................................................. 14 Strength of recommendations............................................................................................... 15 3 Methods ................................................................................................................................. 16 3.1 Additional methods used in this guideline .................................................................. 16 3.1.1 Methods for combining diagnostic evidence: ................................................ 16 3.1.2 Methods for combining direct and indirect evidence (network meta- analysis)............................................................................................................ 16 3.1.3 References ....................................................................................................... 19 4 Evidence Review and Recommendations....................................................................... 20 4.1 Signs, symptoms and risk factors for gallstone disease ........................................... 20 4.1.1 Review Question 1........................................................................................... 20 4.1.2 Evidence Review ............................................................................................. 20 4.1.3 Health economic evidence .............................................................................. 21 4.1.4 Evidence Statements ...................................................................................... 21 4.1.5 Evidence to Recommendations ...................................................................... 21 4.1.6 Recommendations ........................................................................................... 22 4.1.7 Research recommendations ........................................................................... 23 4.1.8 References ....................................................................................................... 23 4.2 Diagnosing gallstone disease ..................................................................................... 29 4.2.1 Review Question 2........................................................................................... 29 4.2.2 Evidence Review ............................................................................................. 29 4.2.3 Health economic evidence .............................................................................. 34 4.2.4 Evidence Statements ...................................................................................... 37 4.2.5 Evidence to Recommendations ...................................................................... 37 4.2.6 Recommendations ........................................................................................... 42 4.2.7 Research recommendations ........................................................................... 42 4.2.8 References ....................................................................................................... 42 4.3 Asymptomatic gallbladder stones ............................................................................... 45 4.3.1 Review Question 3........................................................................................... 45 Internal Clinical Guidelines, 2014 4 Gallstone disease Contents 4.3.2 Evidence Review ............................................................................................. 45 4.3.3 Health economic evidence .............................................................................. 46 4.3.4 Evidence Statements ...................................................................................... 46 4.3.5 Evidence to Recommendations ...................................................................... 47 4.3.6 Recommendations & Research Recommendations ..................................... 48 4.3.7 References ....................................................................................................... 48 4.4 Managing asymptomatic gallbladder stones ............................................................. 49 4.4.1 Review Question 4a ........................................................................................ 49 4.4.2 Evidence Review ............................................................................................. 49 4.4.3 Health economic evidence .............................................................................. 49 4.4.4 Evidence Statements ...................................................................................... 49 4.4.5 Evidence to Recommendations ...................................................................... 49 4.4.6 Recommendations ........................................................................................... 51 4.4.7 Research Recommendations ......................................................................... 51 4.4.8 References ....................................................................................................... 52 4.5 Managing symptomatic gallbladder stones................................................................ 53 4.5.1 Review Question 4b ........................................................................................ 53 4.5.2 Evidence Review ............................................................................................. 53 4.5.3 Health economic evidence .............................................................................. 56 4.5.4 Evidence Statements ...................................................................................... 59 4.5.5 Evidence to Recommendations ...................................................................... 59 4.5.6 Recommendations ........................................................................................... 63 4.5.7 Research recommendations ........................................................................... 64 4.5.8 References ....................................................................................................... 64 4.6 Managing common bile duct stones ........................................................................... 66 4.6.1 Review Question 4c......................................................................................... 66 4.6.2 Evidence Review ............................................................................................. 66 4.6.3 Health economic evidence .............................................................................. 74 4.6.4 Evidence Statements ...................................................................................... 77 4.6.5 Evidence to Recommendations ...................................................................... 78 4.6.6 Recommendations ........................................................................................... 82 4.6.7 Research recommendations ........................................................................... 83 4.6.8 References ....................................................................................................... 83 4.7 Timing of laparoscopic cholecystectomy ................................................................... 86 4.7.1 Review Question 5..........................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Italy and Ligurian Regional HTA Network Abstract Number: 169775
    Abstract Number: 169775 Mini HTA: an effective tool for clinical governance, resource allocation and conflict management at local (Regional) level. Gaddo Flego MD, Francesco Cardinale MD, ASL Nr 4 "Chiavarese", Italy and Ligurian Regional HTA Network The Italian National Health System is centrally governed by the Ministry of Health and by Local Health Authorities (ASL) at Regional level. The Region of Liguria is divided into 5 ASL. Each ASL governs hospitals in the territory of competence. Liguria, for the government of technological innovation, approved with a formal act in 2011 (DGR 295) the creation of a Regional HTA Network in order to implement the process of Health Technology Assessment and to develop the concept of Evidence Based Medicine. The main point of the resolution is the introduction of a Mini HTA grid, that must be filled by proponents before the introduction of any technological innovation. Regional HTA Workflow Since 2011 the Ligurian Network Regional HTA Network has Organisation & Role Hospitals require innovative evaluated the following technologies through Mini devices: Director HTA grid compilation 1) Virtual Colonoscopy CAD Coordination group 2) Porcine Dermal Collagen Surgery Consists of all Professionals who Grid submission to Scientific 3) Sling for urinary incontinence may be involved in the Secretariat 4) Collagen Matrix for sutures evaluation, depending on the 5) Fixation device in surgery device to be evaluated: doctors 6) Sterilization devices with different specialisations, Analysis of quality of data 7) Implantable device for Glaucoma clinical engineers, chemists, produced in the grid, 8) Intravascular Catheter context and scientific health economists and 9) Optical Coherence Tomography literature by the Scientific 10) Pneumothorax drainage system representatives of the citizens.
    [Show full text]
  • Enteroliths in a Kock Continent Ileostomy: Case Report and Review of the Literature
    E200 Cases and Techniques Library (CTL) similar symptoms recurred 2 years later. A second ileoscopy showed a narrowed Enteroliths in a Kock continent ileostomy: efferent loop that was dilated by insertion case report and review of the literature of the colonoscope, with successful relief of her symptoms. Chemical analysis of one of the retrieved enteroliths revealed calcium oxalate crystals. Five cases have previously been noted in the literature Fig. 1 Schematic (●" Table 1). representation of a Kock continent The alkaline milieu of succus entericus in ileostomy. the ileum may induce the precipitation of a calcium oxalate concretion; in contrast, the acidic milieu found more proximally in the intestine enhances the solubility of calcium. The gradual precipitation of un- conjugated bile salts, calcium oxalate, and Valve calcium carbonate crystals around a nidus composed of fecal material or undigested Efferent loop fiber can lead to the formation of calcium oxalate calculi over time [5]. Endoscopy_UCTN_Code_CCL_1AD_2AJ Reservoir Competing interests: None Hadi Moattar1, Jakob Begun1,2, Timothy Florin1,2 1 Department of Gastroenterology, Mater Adult Hospital, South Brisbane, Australia The Kock continent ileostomy (KCI) was dure was done to treat ulcerative pan- 2 Mater Research, University of Queens- designed by Nik Kock, who used an intus- colitis complicated by colon cancer. She land, Translational Research Institute, suscepted ileostomy loop to create a nip- had a well-functioning KCI that she had Woolloongabba, Australia ple valve (●" Fig.1) that would not leak catheterized daily for 34 years before she and would allow ileal effluent to be evac- presented with intermittent abdominal uated with a catheter [1].
    [Show full text]
  • Group Supplemental Limited Benefit Insurance Plan 2
    Group Supplemental Limited Benefit Insurance Plan 2 Group Medical BridgeSM* insurance can help with medical costs associated with a hospital stay that your health insurance may not cover. These benefits are available for you, your spouse and eligible dependent children. *The policy name is Group Supplemental Limited Benefit Insurance. Hospital confinement ............................................................... $_______________1,000 per day Maximum of one day per covered person per calendar year Waiver of premium Available after 30 continuous days of a covered confinement of the named insured £ Daily hospital confinement ................................................................... $100 per day Maximum of 365 days per covered person per confinement. Re-confinement for the same or related condition within 90 days of discharge is considered a continuation of a previous confinement. £ Diagnostic procedure .................................................................. $_______________not available per day Maximum of one day per covered person per calendar year £ Outpatient surgical procedure ¾ Tier 1..................................................................................... $_______________500 per day ¾ Tier 2..................................................................................... $_______________1,000 per day Maximum of $________________1,500 per covered person per calendar year for Tier 1 and 2 combined Maximum of one day per outpatient surgical procedure Diagnostic procedures The following is a list
    [Show full text]
  • ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Right Upper Quadrant Pain
    Revised 2018 American College of Radiology ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Right Upper Quadrant Pain Variant 1: Right upper quadrant pain. Suspected biliary disease. Initial imaging. Procedure Appropriateness Category Relative Radiation Level US abdomen Usually Appropriate O CT abdomen with IV contrast May Be Appropriate ☢☢☢ MRI abdomen without and with IV May Be Appropriate contrast with MRCP O MRI abdomen without IV contrast with May Be Appropriate MRCP O Nuclear medicine scan gallbladder May Be Appropriate ☢☢ CT abdomen without IV contrast May Be Appropriate ☢☢☢ CT abdomen without and with IV Usually Not Appropriate contrast ☢☢☢☢ Variant 2: Right upper quadrant pain. No fever or high white blood cell (WBC) count. Suspected biliary disease. Negative or equivocal ultrasound. Procedure Appropriateness Category Relative Radiation Level MRI abdomen without and with IV Usually Appropriate contrast with MRCP O CT abdomen with IV contrast Usually Appropriate ☢☢☢ MRI abdomen without IV contrast with Usually Appropriate MRCP O Nuclear medicine scan gallbladder May Be Appropriate ☢☢ CT abdomen without IV contrast May Be Appropriate ☢☢☢ CT abdomen without and with IV Usually Not Appropriate contrast ☢☢☢☢ Variant 3: Right upper quadrant pain. Fever, elevated WBC count. Suspected biliary disease. Negative or equivocal ultrasound. Procedure Appropriateness Category Relative Radiation Level MRI abdomen without and with IV Usually Appropriate contrast with MRCP O CT abdomen with IV contrast Usually Appropriate ☢☢☢ Nuclear medicine scan gallbladder Usually Appropriate ☢☢ MRI abdomen without IV contrast with May Be Appropriate MRCP O CT abdomen without IV contrast May Be Appropriate ☢☢☢ CT abdomen without and with IV Usually Not Appropriate contrast ☢☢☢☢ ACR Appropriateness Criteria® 1 Right Upper Quadrant Pain Variant 4: Right upper quadrant pain.
    [Show full text]
  • Cholecystokinin Cholescintigraphy: Methodology and Normal Values Using a Lactose-Free Fatty-Meal Food Supplement
    Cholecystokinin Cholescintigraphy: Methodology and Normal Values Using a Lactose-Free Fatty-Meal Food Supplement Harvey A. Ziessman, MD; Douglas A. Jones, MD; Larry R. Muenz, PhD; and Anup K. Agarval, MS Department of Radiology, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC Fatty meals have been used by investigators and clini- The purpose of this investigation was to evaluate the use of a cians over the years to evaluate gallbladder contraction in commercially available lactose-free fatty-meal food supple- conjunction with oral cholecystography, ultrasonography, ment, as an alternative to sincalide cholescintigraphy, to de- and cholescintigraphy. Proponents assert that fatty meals velop a standard methodology, and to determine normal gall- are physiologic and low in cost. Numerous different fatty bladder ejection fractions (GBEFs) for this supplement. meals have been used. Many are institution specific. Meth- Methods: Twenty healthy volunteers all had negative medical histories for hepatobiliary and gallbladder disease, had no per- odologies have differed, and few investigations have stud- sonal or family history of hepatobiliary disease, and were not ied a sufficient number of subjects to establish valid normal taking any medication known to affect gallbladder emptying. All GBEFs for the specific meal. Whole milk and half-and-half were prescreened with a complete blood cell count, compre- have the advantage of being simple to prepare and admin- hensive metabolic profile, gallbladder and liver ultrasonography, ister (4–7). Milk has been particularly well investigated. and conventional cholescintigraphy. Three of the 20 subjects Large numbers of healthy subjects have been studied, a were eliminated from the final analysis because of an abnormal- clear methodology described, and normal values determined ity in one of the above studies.
    [Show full text]
  • The Diagnosis of Acute Cholecystitis: Sensitivity of Sonography
    The Diagnosis of Acute Cholecystitis: Sensitivity of Sonography, Cholescintigraphy and Computed Tomography Patthisak Changphaisarnkul MD*, Supakajee Saengruang-Orn PhD*, Trirat Boonya-Asadorn MD* * Division of Radiology, Phramonkutklao Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand Objective: To compare the sensitivity of sonographic, cholescintigraphic, and computed tomographic examination of acute cholecystitis to the pathology result, which is considered the Gold Standard. Material and Method: A retrospective analytic study was conducted among 412 patients, aged between 15 and 98 years, who underwent cholecystectomy surgeries, and whose pathology results indicated acute cholecystitis between July 2004 and May 2013. The sensitivity and the differences between sensitivity of the three methods were calculated in all patients. Complicated acute cholecystitis cases were analyzed separately. Results: The three methods demonstrated statistically significant differences in sensitivity (p-value = 0.017), with the cholescintigraphy as the most sensitive method (84.2%), followed by computed tomography (67.3%), and sonography (59.8%). Concerning the samples with the pathology result indicating complicated acute cholecystitis, computed tomography was statistically significantly more sensitive than sonography in detecting acute cholecystitis, whether or not the complications were identified (100% and 63.6%, respectively, with p-value = 0.0055). None of the patients with the pathology result of complicated acute cholecystitis case was examined by cholescintigraphy, thus, no calculation was possible. Regarding the ability to detect the complications of acute cholecystitis, computed tomography had a sensitivity of 35.71% (5 in 14 patients), while sonographic examinations could not detect any of the complications. Conclusion: Cholescintigraphy is a more sensitive method than computed tomography and sonography, but the three methods have its own advantages, disadvantages, and limitations, which must be considered for each individual patient.
    [Show full text]
  • Imaging Indication Guidelines
    IMAGING INDICATION GUIDELINES Your partner in outpatient radiology We are dedicated to achieving the highest levels of quality and safety in outpatient imaging. We developed these Imaging Indication Guidelines to help you choose imaging examinations that will answer your clinical questions for your patients. We hope they will assist you in the pre-authorization and Medicare Appropriate Use Criteria processes. Quality Convenience Affordability High quality reports Appointments when and Reduce your out-of-pocket and equipment where you need them imaging cost 2 | IMAGING INDICATION GUIDELINES Notes IMAGING INDICATION GUIDELINES | 3 Notes 4 | IMAGING INDICATION GUIDELINES We are dedicated to achieving the highest levels of quality and safety, and have developed these Imaging Indication Guidelines to provide information and guidance during the radiology ordering process. General Contrast Guidelines Choose “Radiologist Discretion” on the order and our board certified radiologists will select the contrast option suited to your patient’s history and condition. This will facilitate thepre -authorization process. Generally, contrast is indicated whenever you are concerned about: • Infection (except uncomplicated sinusitis) • Organ integrity • Tumor or cancer • Possible disc after lumbar surgery • Vascular abnormality (except stroke) Generally, contrasted MRI scans are performed with and without contrast. Generally, CT scans are performed either with or without contrast in order to limit the patient’s radiation dose. Without & with contrast CT scans are indicated for these conditions: • Thoracic aortic dissection • Kidney mass • Liver mass • Painless hematuria • Pancreas mass • Bladder mass • Adrenal gland mass Exams Commonly Confused: • Cervical CT or MRI (for vs. Soft tissue neck CT or MRI (for soft cervical spine) tissue, e.g.
    [Show full text]
  • Review on Lithotripsy and Cavitation in Urinary Stone Therapy Morteza Ghorbani, Ozlem Oral, Sinan Ekici, Devrim Gozuacik, and Ali Kos¸Ar
    264 IEEE REVIEWS IN BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING, VOL. 9, 2016 Review on Lithotripsy and Cavitation in Urinary Stone Therapy Morteza Ghorbani, Ozlem Oral, Sinan Ekici, Devrim Gozuacik, and Ali Kos¸ar (Clinical Application Review) Abstract—Cavitation is the sudden formation of vapor particles around their initial positions, resulting in local changes bubbles or voids in liquid media and occurs after rapid in liquid pressure. Depending on the frequency, the level of changes in pressure as a consequence of mechanical acoustical energy and/or pressure can be targeted to the desired forces. It is mostly an undesirable phenomenon. Although the elimination of cavitation is a major topic in the study area, thereby enabling the use of ultrasound in therapeutic appli- of fluid dynamics, its destructive nature could be exploited cations. Because of its ability to exert localized energy from sur- for therapeutic applications. Ultrasonic and hydrodynamic face of the skin into soft tissues, ultrasound has attracted much sources are two main origins for generating cavitation. The interest as a noninvasive and targeted therapeutic treatment [1]. purpose of this review is to give the reader a general idea According to the exposure conditions such as frequency, pres- about the formation of cavitation phenomenon and exist- ing biomedical applications of ultrasonic and hydrodynamic sure, or duration, ultrasound can prompt thermal, acoustic radia- cavitation. Because of the high number of the studies on ul- tion force, and cavitational effects, which are important parame- trasound cavitation in the literature, the main focus of this ters to improve therapeutic effectiveness of ultrasonic cavitation review is placed on the lithotripsy techniques, which have in various biomedical applications [2]–[5].
    [Show full text]
  • Magnetic Resonance Cholangio-Pancreatography in Patients with Acute Cholecystitis and Cholestatic Liver Pattern - What to Expect?
    Jemds.com Original Research Article Magnetic Resonance Cholangio-Pancreatography in Patients with Acute Cholecystitis and Cholestatic Liver Pattern - What to Expect? Ali Al Orf1, Khawaja Bilal Waheed2, Ali Salman Alshehri3, Mushref Ali Algarni4, Bilal Altaf5, Muhammad Amjad6, Ayman Abdullah Alhumaid7, Zechariah Jebakumar Arulanantham8 1Department of Radiology, King Fahad Military Medical Complex, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. 2Department of Radiology, King Fahad Military Medical Complex, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. 3Department of Radiology, King Fahad Military Medical Complex, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. 4Department of Radiology, King Fahad Military Medical Complex, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. 5Department of General Surgery, King Fahad Military Medical Complex, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. 6Department of Internal Medicine, King Fahad Military Medical Complex, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. 7Department of Radiology, King Fahad Military Medical Complex, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. 8Prince Sultan Military College of Health Sciences, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. ABSTRACT BACKGROUND Acute cholecystitis is a potentially serious condition and usually needs to be treated Corresponding Author: in the hospital. Identification of a common bile duct (CBD) stone before Khawaja Bilal Waheed, Consultant General Radiologist, cholecystectomy is of concern for the treating physicians as management may King Fahad Military Medical Complex, change. Magnetic Resonance Cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) can help in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia. identifying causes of biliary obstruction (if present) and adequately delineate biliary E-mail: [email protected] tree in selected patients with limited or abnormal ultrasounds and cholestatic liver DOI: 10.14260/jemds/2020/530 pattern. Therefore, we aim to demonstrate imaging findings of MRCP in such patients of acute cholecystitis, and highlight the diagnostic ability of MRCP in biliary ductal How to Cite This Article: evaluation as well.
    [Show full text]
  • Table 1. Summary of Criterion Evidence
    SUMMARY TABLE Table 1: Summary of Criterion Evidence Domain 1: Criteria Related to the Underlying Health Condition Criterion Synthesized Information 1 Size of the affected No estimates of point prevalence of acute cholecystitis were found in the literature. An Ontario population hospital-based study29 estimated the annual incidence of acute cholecystitis from 1992 to 2000 to be 0.88 people per 1,000 population. The size of affected population is more than 1 in 10,000 (0.01%) and less than or equal 1 in 1,000 (0.1%) 2 Timeliness and Saskatchewan hospital guidelines indicate that cholescintigraphy for diagnosis of suspected acute urgency of test cholecystitis should be conducted within 24 hours (Patrick Au, Acute and Emergency Services results in planning Branch, Saskatchewan Ministry of Health: unpublished data, 2011) patient management The target time frame for performing the test is in 24 hours or less and obtaining the 99mTc-based test results in the appropriate timely manner for the underlying condition has significant impact on the management of the condition or the effective use of health care resources. 3 Impact of not If a test for diagnosing acute cholecystitis is not available, treatment might be delayed and performing a complications associated with high mortality rates might be more likely to develop. Complications diagnostic imaging from acute cholecystitis occur in around 20% of patients and complicated acute cholecystitis is test on mortality associated with a mortality rate of around 25%.33 Perforation of the gallbladder, which occurs in related to the 3% to 15% of patients with cholecystitis, has a 60% mortality rate.34 Acute acalculous cholecystitis underlying condition has a mortality rate of around 30%.35 Diagnostic imaging test results can have minimal impact on mortality.
    [Show full text]
  • Icd-9-Cm (2010)
    ICD-9-CM (2010) PROCEDURE CODE LONG DESCRIPTION SHORT DESCRIPTION 0001 Therapeutic ultrasound of vessels of head and neck Ther ult head & neck ves 0002 Therapeutic ultrasound of heart Ther ultrasound of heart 0003 Therapeutic ultrasound of peripheral vascular vessels Ther ult peripheral ves 0009 Other therapeutic ultrasound Other therapeutic ultsnd 0010 Implantation of chemotherapeutic agent Implant chemothera agent 0011 Infusion of drotrecogin alfa (activated) Infus drotrecogin alfa 0012 Administration of inhaled nitric oxide Adm inhal nitric oxide 0013 Injection or infusion of nesiritide Inject/infus nesiritide 0014 Injection or infusion of oxazolidinone class of antibiotics Injection oxazolidinone 0015 High-dose infusion interleukin-2 [IL-2] High-dose infusion IL-2 0016 Pressurized treatment of venous bypass graft [conduit] with pharmaceutical substance Pressurized treat graft 0017 Infusion of vasopressor agent Infusion of vasopressor 0018 Infusion of immunosuppressive antibody therapy Infus immunosup antibody 0019 Disruption of blood brain barrier via infusion [BBBD] BBBD via infusion 0021 Intravascular imaging of extracranial cerebral vessels IVUS extracran cereb ves 0022 Intravascular imaging of intrathoracic vessels IVUS intrathoracic ves 0023 Intravascular imaging of peripheral vessels IVUS peripheral vessels 0024 Intravascular imaging of coronary vessels IVUS coronary vessels 0025 Intravascular imaging of renal vessels IVUS renal vessels 0028 Intravascular imaging, other specified vessel(s) Intravascul imaging NEC 0029 Intravascular
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 GI Endoscopy Coding and Reimbursement Guide
    2020 GI Endoscopy Coding and Reimbursement Guide Disclaimer: The information provided herein reflects Cook’s understanding of the procedure(s) and/or device(s) from sources that may include, but are not limited to, the CPT® coding system; Medicare payment systems; commercially available coding guides; professional societies; and research conducted by independent coding and reimbursement consultants. This information should not be construed as authoritative. The entity billing Medicare and/or third party payers is solely responsible for the accuracy of the codes assigned to the services and items in the medical record. Cook does not, and should not, have access to medical records, and therefore cannot recommend codes for specific cases. When you are making coding decisions, we encourage you to seek input from the AMA, relevant medical societies, CMS, your local Medicare Administrative Contractor and other health plans to which you submit claims. Cook does not promote the off-label use of its devices. The reimbursement rates provided are national Medicare averages published by CMS at the time this guide was created. Reimbursement rates may change due to addendum updates Medicare publishes throughout the year and may not be reflected on the guide. CPT © 2019 American Medical Association. All rights reserved. CPT is a registered trademark of the American Medical Association. If you have any questions, please contact our reimbursement team at 800.468.1379 or by e-mail at [email protected]. 2020 GI Endoscopy Guide Medicare Reimbursement
    [Show full text]