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

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the emergency department visit (99285) provided on August 
11, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for procedure code 99285. You say that the medical records support the billing of 
code 99285. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the medical records do not support the billing of code 
99285. 
 
The Plan follows Medicare billing and payment rules. The rules say that codes billed must accurately reflect 
the services provided.   
 
In this case, you billed CPT code 99285. The definition of CPT code 99285 is an emergency room visit for the 
evaluation and management of a patient which requires three components (taking into account the urgency of 
the clinical condition or the patient's mental status): 
 
1. a comprehensive history; 
2. a comprehensive examination; and 3. medical decision making of high complexity. 
 
In addition, CPT code 99285 usually includes a presenting medical problem of high severity and immediate 
significant threat to life or physiologic function.  
 
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 pay for procedure code 99285. Our reviewer says 
that the medical records do not support the billing of code 99285. Our reviewer found the enrollee was with a 
history of hypertension (HTN), hyperlipidemia (HLD), and hypothyroidism who presented to the emergency 
department (ED) on August 11, 2022, with weakness x 1-2 weeks. She was evaluated with a history and 
physical and laboratory studies. The reviewed documentation indicates that Current Procedural Terminology 
(CPT) code 99285-25 (1 unit) was not supported. The evaluation and management code billed requires a 
comprehensive history, a comprehensive examination and medical decision making of high complexity. 
However, the medical records submitted don't support a medical decision making of high complexity. 
 
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of procedure code 99285 have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan 
does not have to pay for the emergency department visit (99285) provided on August 11, 2022.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Favorable

 
We decided that the Plan has to pre-approve intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve IMRT. You say that this is the best treatment plan. The Plan denied your 
request. The Plan says that there is no rationale for IMRT versus standard radiation therapy. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that if there are no specific coverage rules for an item 
or service, then that item or service will be covered when it is 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 pre-approve IMRT. Our reviewer says that the 
requested items/services are considered medically reasonable and necessary in this case. Our physician 
reviewer found the dose prescribed is relatively high, and the IMRT plan results in marked reduction in bowel 
exposure such that it is plausible that IMRT could be of benefit to the enrollee in lowering toxicity to the bowel 
particularly given that concurrent chemotherapy is to be given. 
 
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of IMRT have been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan has to pre-approve 
intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT).  
 
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: 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 has the medical complexity to warrant 
an acute inpatient rehabilitation admission. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the IRF services 
requested do not meet the requirements for approval. 
 
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 enrollee's nursing, medical and rehabilitation needs does not 
require an acute hospital inpatient stay with an interdisciplinary approach to rehabilitation care. Our reviewer 
found that the enrollee does not require treatment by multiple therapies, including either physical therapy or 
occupational therapy, and an intensive rehabilitation therapy program. While the medical record supports a 
need for physical and/or occupational therapy, there is no documented need for intensive rehabilitation 
services. Our physician reviewer also found that there is not a reasonable expectation that this enrollee will be 
able to fully participate in and benefit from the intensive rehabilitation therapy program provided in an IRF. 
 
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: Drugs
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve Keytruda (pembrolizumab). 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve Keytruda. You say that you disagree with the Plan's denial. The Plan denied 
your request. The Plan says the requested drug is not medically necessary. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that Medicare may pay for unlabeled uses for anti-cancer 
drugs if they are medically accepted as safe and effective or appropriate for the particular use.  
 
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 Keytruda. Our reviewer says that the 
documentation does not support that the requested drug meets step therapy criteria. Our physician reviewer 
found the enrollee has a diagnosis of metastatic adenocarcinoma non-small cell lung cancer with PDL-1 
expression less than 1%.  The Food and Drug Administration has not stated that the requested drug is indicated for the enrollee's 
condition. The Medicare approved cancer drug compendia do not contain a supportive citation for the use of 
the requested drug in the enrollee's clinical situation. No literature from Medicare approved cancer journals 
were submitted for review. Therefore, the enrollee does not meet criteria for the requested drug. 
 
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of Keytruda have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have 
to pre-approve Keytruda (pembrolizumab).
Appeal type: Drugs
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve Injectafer. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve Injectafer. You say that the requested Injectafer is medically necessary. The 
Plan denied your request. The Plan says the enrollee must try and fail Venofer first. 
 
Medicare covers Part B medications when they are reasonable and necessary but allows health plans to 
implement step therapy criteria. The Plan's contract indicates that it has implemented such criteria for certain Part B medications. 
 
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 Injectafer. Our reviewer says that the 
Plan's step therapy criteria have not been met. Our physician reviewer found the record indicates that the 
enrollee has iron deficiency anemia. The requested medication is a new start. The provided records do not 
indicate that the enrollee has tried and failed the plan's preferred step one alternative. The record does not 
indicate that the enrollee has a contraindication to or would have an adverse effect from the plan's preferred 
step one alternative. The elements of the coverage criteria are not satisfied. The requested service cannot be 
recommended. 
 
We looked at this physician's review, the file, and Medicare rules. Based on this information, we decided that 
Medicare rules for coverage of Injectafer have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have 
to pre-approve Injectafer.
Appeal type: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the office visit (99203) provided on July 29, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for this service. You say that you are requesting a reconsideration of the Plan's 
denial for payment. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says this service is not a covered benefit. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that the only chiropractic service Medicare covers is 
manual manipulation of the spine to correct a subluxation.  
 
The records show that the service at issue is not manual manipulation of the spine. Therefore, we decided that 
the Plan does not have to pay for the office visit (99203) provided on July 29, 2022.
Appeal type: Home Health
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the home health services provided from January 6, 2022, to 
February 4, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for the home health services as billed. You say that you disagree with the denial. The 
Plan denied your request. The Plan says the claim has not been billed with the correct admission date. 
 
The Plan follows Medicare rules. The rules say that for home health services that are continuing from 2021, a 
NOA must be submitted for the first period of care in 2022, using the first date of the period as the admission 
date. Subsequent claims must report this new date as the admission date in order for the claim to be matched to 
the correct NOA.   
We reviewed the file and the Medicare rules. We find that the admission date reported on the claim at issue 
does not match the date for the NOA which is filed for the first date in 2022 as required. Based on this 
information, we find that the Medicare rules for payment of the claim at issue have not been met. Therefore, we 
decided that the Plan does not have to pay for the home health services provided from January 6, 2022, to 
February 4, 2022.
Appeal type: Drugs
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve Tirosint. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve Tirosint. You say that you disagree with the Plan's denial. The Plan denied 
your request. The Plan says the requested drug is not a covered benefit. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. The rules say that Medicare Part B generally does not pay for self-
administered drugs. The self-administered drugs requested here are not among the types which are covered by 
Medicare Part B. Therefore, we decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve Tirosint.  
 
Benefits for Tirosint may be available under Medicare Part D. Contact the Plan that administers Part D benefits 
for further information concerning any benefits and appeal rights.
Appeal type: Imaging
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for procedure code 70450 billed for date of service October 19, 
2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for procedure code 70450. You say that the member had multiple exams done on 
this date of service. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says payment for code 70450 is bundled into 
payment for code 70496. 
 The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that providers must report services correctly. 
Providers must report services with the appropriate CPT code. In this case, we have confirmed that code 70450 
is a column II code to column I code 70496. This claim has not been billed with an appropriate modifier to 
bypass the edit. Based on the claim submitted, Medicare billing criteria have not been met. Therefore, we 
decided that the Plan does not have to pay for procedure code 70450 billed for date of service October 19, 
2022.
Appeal type: DME/ Orthotics
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve continued coverage of the continuous airway pressure 
(CPAP) device and supplies coded as E0601, E0562, A7039, A7038, A7036, A7035, A7033, A7032, A7031, 
A7030, A7029, A7028 and A4604. 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve the CPAP device and supplies. You say that attached is all of the clinicals 
needed and signed by the doctor to support as to why the enrollee needed the medical equipment. The Plan 
denied your request. The Plan says the records do not show that the enrollee meets the criteria for the CPAP 
machine and supplies. 
 
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 CPAP device and supplies. Our 
reviewer says that the requested items/services are not considered medically reasonable and necessary in this 
case. Our physician reviewer found continued coverage of a CPAP device and supplies is not medically 
necessary. This enrollee has mild obstructive sleep apnea. The CPAP was prescribed in September 2022. The 
enrollee has been unable to meet minimum usage requirements. Compliance reports have consistently shown 
the enrollee is using the device at least 4 hours a day for less than 50% of days, which does not meet minimum 
Medicare requirements of at least 70% of days. Attempts to address the compliance issue in a follow-up 
clinical visit were unsuccessful. The enrollee is not using the device enough to be effective, and the denial is 
therefore upheld. 
 
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 CPAP device and supplies have not been met. Therefore, we decided that 
the Plan does not have to pre-approve continued coverage of the continuous airway pressure (CPAP) device 
and supplies coded as E0601, E0562, A7039, A7038, A7036, A7035, A7033, A7032, A7031, A7030, A7029, 
A7028 and A4604.
Appeal type: Imaging
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for procedure code 93010 billed for date of service August 15, 
2022. 
 You asked the Plan to pay for procedure code 93010. You say that the claim was billed correctly and should be 
paid. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says payment for code 93010 is bundled into payment for code 
31500. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that providers must report services correctly. 
Providers must report services with the appropriate CPT code. In this case, we have confirmed that code 93010 
is a column II code to column I code 31500. This claim has not been billed with an appropriate modifier to 
bypass the edit. Based on the claim submitted, Medicare billing criteria have not been met. Therefore, we 
decided that the Plan does not have to pay for procedure code 93010 billed for date of service August 15, 2022.
Appeal type: Imaging
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for procedure code 70450 billed for date of service June 9, 2022. 
 
You asked the Plan to pay for procedure code 70450. You say that the claim was billed correctly and should be 
paid. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says payment for code 70450 is bundled into payment for code 
70496.  
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that providers must report services correctly. 
Providers must report services with the appropriate CPT code. In this case, we have confirmed that code 70450 
is a column II code to column I code 70496. This claim has not been billed with an appropriate modifier to 
bypass the edit. Based on the claim submitted, Medicare billing criteria have not been met. Therefore, we 
decided that the Plan does not have to pay for procedure code 70450 billed for date of service June 9, 2022.
Appeal type: Imaging
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pay for procedure code 70450 billed for date of service September 2, 
2022. 
 You asked the Plan to pay for procedure code 70450. You say that the claim was billed correctly and should be 
paid. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says payment for code 70450 is bundled into payment for code 
70496. 
 
The Plan must follow Medicare rules. Medicare rules say that providers must report services correctly. 
Providers must report services with the appropriate CPT code. In this case, we have confirmed that code 70450 
is a column II code to column I code 70496. This claim has not been billed with an appropriate modifier to 
bypass the edit. Based on the claim submitted, Medicare billing criteria have not been met. Therefore, we 
decided that the Plan does not have to pay for procedure code 70450 billed for date of service September 2, 
2022.
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. The Plan denied your request. The Plan says the 
requested LTACH services requested do not meet the requirements for approval. 
 
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 the enrollee does not require services at the LTACH that are not already available at 
the current facility. There are no services at the LTACH that the enrollee requires that are not already available 
and covered at the current facility. Our reviewer found that transfer to the LTACH is not medically necessary 
as it would not be clinically advantageous at this time. Our physician reviewer also found that completion of 
treatment at the current facility is recommended. 
 
 
 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: Practitioner Services
Decision: Unfavorable

 
We decided that the Plan does not have to pre-approve a catheter placement in coronary artery(s) for coronary 
angiography, including intraprocedural injection(s) for coronary angiography, imaging supervision and 
interpretation; with left heart catheterization including intraprocedural injection(s) for left ventriculography, 
when performed (93458). 
 
You asked the Plan to pre-approve a left heart catheterization. You say that you disagree with the denial. The 
Plan denied your request. The Plan says the left heart catheterization is not medically necessary at this time. 
 
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 a left heart catheterization. Our 
reviewer says that the requested items/services are not considered medically reasonable and necessary in this 
case. Our physician reviewer found at issue is the medical appropriateness and necessity for performance of 
cardiac catheterization. The medical records provided reveal a negative radionuclide stress test in 2022. No 
further stress testing has been carried out. Guidelines do not support a need for invasive cardiac catheterization 
in this setting. As a result, at this time cardiac catheterization would not be considered medically appropriate 
and necessary in this enrollee's clinical management. 
 
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 left heart catheterization have not been met. Therefore, we decided that the 
Plan does not have to pre-approve a catheter placement in coronary artery(s) for coronary angiography, 
including intraprocedural injection(s) for coronary angiography, imaging supervision and interpretation; with 
left heart catheterization including intraprocedural injection(s) for left ventriculography, when performed 
(93458).