Persius/hicric huggingface dataset:
Appeal type: Surgery
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve the laminectomy (63655), and insertion of spinal 
neurostimulator (63685). 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the stimulator placement. You say that the service is medically necessary. 
The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the service is not medically necessary. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that items and services that are not medically 
necessary are not covered.  
 
We asked our physician reviewer to carefully review the case file and apply the relevant Medicare rules to 
determine if the Plan was correct in denying the request to pre-approve the stimulator placement. Our reviewer 
says that the requested services are not considered medically reasonable and necessary in this case. Our 
physician reviewer found the medical records do not include an appropriate diagnosis for stimulator placement. 
 
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of the stimulator placement have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan 
does not have to pre-approve the laminectomy (63655), and insertion of spinal neurostimulator (63685).
Appeal type: Testing
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for procedure code 76642 billed for date of service November 
14, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for procedure code 76642. You say that the claim was billed correctly and should be 
paid. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the number of units billed exceeds the maximum allowed. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that claims submitted where the unit of service 
exceeds the MUE value for the HCPCS/CPT code will be denied.  
In this case, the MUE for CPT code 76642 is 1. The MAI value for this code is 2. You billed 2 units of this 
code, exceeding the MUE. Specifically, you billed one line item of this code with the LT modifier and one line 
item of this code with the RT modifier instead of billing one line item with the bilateral modifier as is required. 
Based on this information, we decided that Medicare rules for coverage of procedure code 76642 have not been 
met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pay for procedure code 76642 billed for date of 
service November 14, 2022.
Appeal type: Lab
Decision: Favorable

 
We decided that the Plan has to pay for laboratory testing (87481, 87491, 87511, 87529, 87563, 87591, 87640, 
87651, 87653, and 87798) 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for laboratory services. You say that these tests were medically necessary and were 
ordered by the enrollee's treating physician. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says that these services 
must be billed with a single procedure code and single unit of service per the Local Coverage Article: Billing 
and Coding: MolDX: Molecular Syndromic Panels for Infectious Disease Pathogen Identification Testing 
(A58747). 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that Medicare health plans must make reasonable and 
diligent efforts to gather and forward to the IRE information regarding its decision to deny coverage or 
payment. 
 
The Plan has not made reasonable and diligent efforts to gather and forward to us information regarding their 
decision to deny your request. Specifically, the medical records and section 11 of the claim form indicate that 
these tests were performed in a state which is not under the jurisdiction of the applied Local Coverage Article. 
The Plan has not provided a relevant citation to support their denial in this case. Therefore, we decided that the 
Plan has to pay for laboratory testing (87481, 87491, 87511, 87529, 87563, 87591, 87640, 87651, 87653, and 
87798)  
 
If the Plan does not agree with our decision, they can ask us to open a case again. We only open a case again 
if we believe there was a mistake or if there is new information to review. The Plan has to show us the mistake 
and/or send us the new information. This does not happen often. If we decide to open the case again, we will 
send you a letter.
Appeal type: Lab
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for lab services provided on August 1, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the lab services. You say that these services were necessary and are supported as 
billed. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says you billed with an incorrect place of service on the claim. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that, for lab services, the POS code must reflect the 
location in which the sample was taken. POS code 81 is used to describe samples taken by the laboratory 
directly. 
 
We looked at the file and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that Medicare rules for 
coverage of the lab services have not been met. Specifically, this claim was billed with the laboratory POS code. The records do not support that the sample was taken in a laboratory setting. Therefore, we decided that 
the Plan does not have to pay for lab services provided on August 1, 2022.
Appeal type: Inpatient Hospital
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve acute inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) admission 
and services. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve IRF care. You say that the enrollee's treatment for rehabilitation is to regain 
max function and could lose without proper care. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the enrollee 
records do not show that are able to take part in 3 hours of therapy at day at least 5 days a week or 15 hours per 
week. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that IRF admission is covered only when it is medically 
reasonable and necessary as described in the Medicare rules section. 
 
We asked our physician reviewer to carefully review the case file and apply the relevant Medicare rules to 
determine if the Plan was correct in denying the request to pre-approve IRF care. Our reviewer says that the 
requested IRF care is not considered medically reasonable and necessary based on Medicare guidelines. Our physician reviewer found the complexity of the enrollees nursing, medical and rehabilitation needs do not 
require an acute rehabilitation hospital inpatient stay with an interdisciplinary approach to rehabilitation care. 
 
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of IRF care have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have 
to pre-approve acute inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) admission and services.
Appeal type: Surgery
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve an Intracept procedure (64628, 64629). 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve an Intracept procedure. You say that the requested services are a medical 
necessity for the enrollee. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the requested service are 
experimental/investigational. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that items and services that are not medically 
necessary are not covered.  
 
We asked our physician reviewer to carefully review the case file and apply the relevant Medicare rules to 
determine if the Plan was correct in denying the request to pre-approve an Intracept procedure. Our reviewer 
says that the requested services are not considered medically reasonable and necessary in this case. Our 
physician reviewer found that the Intracept procedure is experimental. More research is needed to demonstrate 
its safety and efficacy. 
 
 
  We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of an Intracept procedure have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan 
does not have to pre-approve an Intracept procedure (64628, 64629).
Appeal type: Lab
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the lab services provided on September 2, 2021. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the lab services. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says you billed with an 
incorrect place of service on the claim. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that, for lab services, the POS code must reflect the 
location in which the sample was taken. POS code 81 is used to describe samples taken by the laboratory 
directly. 
 
We looked at the file and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that Medicare rules for 
coverage of the lab services have not been met. Specifically, this claim was billed with the laboratory POS code. The records do not support that the sample was taken in a laboratory setting. Therefore, we decided that 
the Plan does not have to pay for the lab services provided on September 2, 2021.
Appeal type: Inpatient Hospital
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve acute inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) admission 
and services. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve IRF care. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says your records do not 
show that your rehabilitation needs are complex and that you need to be seen 3 times per week for evaluation 
of functional and medical goals, progress and you do not need an intensive team for your care. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that IRF admission is covered only when it is medically 
reasonable and necessary as described in the Medicare rules section. 
 
We asked our physician reviewer to carefully review the case file and apply the relevant Medicare rules to 
determine if the Plan was correct in denying the request to pre-approve IRF care. Our reviewer says that the 
requested IRF care is not considered medically reasonable and necessary based on Medicare guidelines. Our 
physician reviewer found there is no indication the enrollee would require skilled rehabilitation in an IRF, participating in rehabilitation services 15 hours a week, under the supervision of a physician with at least 3 
visits weekly to regain or maintain his functional status the enrollee can receive further services at a lower level 
of care. 
 
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of IRF care have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have 
to pre-approve acute inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) admission and services.
Appeal type: Inpatient Hospital
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve long term acute care hospital (LTACH) services. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the LTACH services. You say that the enrollee meets criteria for an LTACH 
admission. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the enrollee is receiving appropriate inpatient acute 
care and is currently unstable for transfer to an LTACH. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that LTACH services are covered if they are medically 
necessary, reasonable, and appropriate for the diagnosis and condition of the enrollee. 
 
We asked our physician reviewer to carefully review the case file and apply the relevant Medicare rules to 
determine if the Plan was correct in denying the request to pre-approve the LTACH services. Our reviewer says 
that the requested LTACH care is not considered medically reasonable and necessary in this case. Our 
physician reviewer found that all medically necessary care is being provided in the current acute care setting. 
There are no services available at the LTACH that the enrollee requires that are not available at the health care 
setting being offered by the Plan. The Plan has approved ongoing care in the current acute care setting. The 
requested LTACH services are not medically necessary, reasonable, and appropriate for the diagnosis and 
condition of the enrollee and able to be furnished safely and effectively only on an inpatient basis. 
 
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that Medicare rules for coverage of the LTACH services have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan 
does not have to pre-approve long term acute care hospital (LTACH) services.
Appeal type: Inpatient Hospital
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve acute inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) admission 
and services. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve IRF care. You say that the requested admission to an IRF is medically 
necessary. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the requested admission to an IRF does not meet 
criteria. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that IRF admission is covered only when it is medically 
reasonable and necessary as described in the Medicare rules section. 
 
 
 
 
 We asked our physician reviewer to carefully review the case file and apply the relevant Medicare rules to 
determine if the Plan was correct in denying the request to pre-approve IRF care. Our reviewer says that the 
requested IRF care is not considered medically reasonable and necessary based on Medicare guidelines. Our 
physician reviewer found the complexity of your nursing, medical and rehabilitation needs do not require an 
acute rehab hospital inpatient stay with an interdisciplinary approach to rehabilitation care. You do not require 
treatment by multiple therapies, including either physical therapy or occupational therapy, at an intensive 
rehabilitation therapy program. You continue to have a need for skilled therapy with ongoing safety concerns 
and a potential for functional improvement however, the documentation does not support that you would meet 
criteria for admission to an acute inpatient rehabilitation facility.  There is no indication that you would require 
skilled rehabilitation in an IRF, participating in rehab services 15 hours a week, under the supervision of a 
physician with at least 3 visits weekly to regain or maintain your functional status. You can receive further 
services at a lower level of care. 
 
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of IRF care have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have 
to pre-approve acute inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) admission and services.
Appeal type: Surgery
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve the radiofrequency ablation procedure (64635).  
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the procedure. You say that you are requesting reconsideration of the 
previous decision and allow coverage for the procedure. 
 The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the records do not show that the criteria has been met. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that items and services that are not medically 
necessary are not covered.  
 
We asked our physician reviewer to carefully review the case file and apply the relevant Medicare rules to 
determine if the Plan was correct in denying the request to pre-approve the surgical procedure. Our reviewer 
says that the requested items/services are not considered medically reasonable and necessary in this case. Our 
physician reviewer found the provided documentation states that the enrollee does not have radiation of pain 
into the lower extremities, however, has numbness in the lower extremities involving the knees and distal lower 
extremities. The enrollee has been treated with medical therapy and underwent medical branch blocks (MBBs) 
at L5-S1 on October 31, 2022, and November 14, 2022, which provided 80-90% pain relief. Per the coverage 
criteria, facet injections are indicated when there is no non-facet pathology per clinical assessment or radiology 
studies that could explain the source of the patients pain, including but not limited to fracture, tumor, infection, 
or significant deformity. In this case, the MRI results demonstrated multiple potential etiologies of the 
enrollees low back pain and the provided documentation did not indicate that these had been fully evaluated. 
Records indicate that the enrollee may also have some degree of sacroiliac joint pain and osteoarthritis of the 
hips, bilaterally. The review has determined that the items/services at issue in this case are not medically 
reasonable or necessary. 
 
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of the surgical procedure have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan 
does not have to pre-approve the radiofrequency ablation procedure (64635).
Appeal type: Inpatient Hospital
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve acute inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) admission 
and services. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve IRF care. You say that your complex nursing, medical and rehabilitation 
needs require an acute inpatient with interdisciplinary approach to rehabilitation care. The Plan denied your 
request. The Plan says your records do not show that you need an intensive team for your care. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that IRF admission is covered only when it is medically 
reasonable and necessary as described in the Medicare rules section. 
 
We asked our physician reviewer to carefully review the case file and apply the relevant Medicare rules to 
determine if the Plan was correct in denying the request to pre-approve IRF care. Our reviewer says that the 
requested IRF care is not considered medically reasonable and necessary based on Medicare guidelines. Our 
physician reviewer found the enrollee continues to have a need for skilled therapy with ongoing safety concerns and a potential for functional improvement however, the documentation doesnt support meeting the 
criteria for admission to an acute inpatient rehabilitation facility. 
 
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of IRF care have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have 
to pre-approve acute inpatient rehabilitation facility (IRF) admission and services.
Appeal type: DME/ Orthotics
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a semi-electric hospital bed (E0260). 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve a semi-electric hospital bed. You say that you need this bed because you 
wear a neck brace, and your doctor requested this bed for you. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says you 
do not meet criteria for approval of the requested hospital bed. 
 
 
 
 
 The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that a semi-electric hospital bed may be considered 
medically necessary when the patient: 
 
1. Has a medical condition which requires positioning of the body in ways not feasible with an ordinary bed; or 
 
2. Requires attachments which can only be attached to a hospital bed; AND 
 
3. Requires frequent changes in body position and/or has an immediate need for a change in body position. 
 
We asked our physician reviewer to carefully review the case file and apply the relevant Medicare rules to 
determine if the Plan was correct in denying the request to pre-approve a semi-electric hospital bed. Our 
reviewer says that the service is not medically necessary. Our physician reviewer found you have a past 
medical history including a previous C1/C2 vertebral fracture with dislocation. The documentation indicates 
you have improved medically. You have had the brace removed and have been ambulating. The documentation 
does not support that you have a condition that requires frequent positioning of the bed and mattress to alleviate 
pain, promote good body alignment, prevent contractures or avoid respiratory infections in a way that an 
ordinary bed is not able to. 
 
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of a semi-electric hospital bed have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the 
Plan does not have to pre-approve a semi-electric hospital bed (E0260).
Appeal type: Imaging
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to provide a positron emission tomography (PET) scan. 
 
You asked the Plan to provide a positron emission tomography (PET) scan. You say that you would like to 
request reconsideration of the denied authorization. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the criteria for 
approval have not been met. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that PET scans are covered only when they are 
medically necessary.  
 
We asked our physician reviewer to carefully review the case file and apply the relevant Medicare rules to 
determine if the Plan was correct in denying the request to provide a positron emission tomography (PET) scan. 
Our reviewer says that the service is not medically necessary. Our physician reviewer found the enrollee does 
not meet the CMS criteria for PET imaging. 
 
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of a positron emission tomography (PET) scan have not been met. Therefore, we 
decided that the Plan does not have to provide a positron emission tomography (PET) scan.
Appeal type: DME/ Orthotics
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the Pneumatic compression services (E0673, E0675), 
provided on July 22, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the Pneumatic compression services. You say that the services were medically 
necessary. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says these items were not used in the home. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that for equipment to be covered, it must be appropriate 
and needed for use inside the home. Medicare does not consider a SNF or a hospital to be a home.  
 
Records show that the Pneumatic compression services was used in an ambulatory surgical center. Therefore, 
we decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the Pneumatic compression services (E0673, E0675), 
provided on July 22, 2022.
Appeal type: Surgery
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve VIA Disc Matrix. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve VIA Disc Matrix. You say that the services are necessary. The Plan denied 
your request. The Plan says based on the documentation provided, coverage criteria has not been met. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that items and services that are not medically 
necessary are not covered.  
 
We asked our physician reviewer to carefully review the case file and apply the relevant Medicare rules to 
determine if the Plan was correct in denying the request to pre-approve VIA Disc Matrix. Our reviewer says 
that the requested items/services are not considered medically reasonable and necessary in this case. Our 
physician reviewer found Via Disc allograft remains experimental in spinal surgery. 
 
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of VIA Disc Matrix have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does 
not have to pre-approve VIA Disc Matrix.