|
|
|
Effective Date: 11/01/2011 |
Title: Cardiac Event Recorder, External Loop Recorder
|
Revision Date: 06/01/2019
|
Document: BI317:00
|
CPT Code(s): 93241, 93242, 93243, 93244, 93245, 93246, 93247, 93248, 93268, 93270-93272, 0295T, 0296T, 0297T, 0298T
|
Public Statement
|
Effective Date:
a)
This policy
will apply to all services performed on or after the above revision date which
will become the new effective date.
b)
For all
services referred to in this policy that were performed before the revision
date, contact customer service for the rules that would apply.
There are several devices to monitor cardiac rhythm of the ambulatory patient.
Rhythm can be monitored continuously or intermittently by external or implanted
devices. The simplest is the patient-activated event recorder that the patient
carries in their pocket or purse. The patient activates this device at the time
of symptoms by placing the recorder against the chest and pressing a button.
This device does not review an asymptomatic event or rhythm before patient
activation.
These
devices are covered for patients who have symptoms that may indicate cardiac
rhythm disturbance.
|
Medical Statement
|
A pre-symptom
memory loop cardiac event recorder meets primary coverage criteria for
effectiveness and is covered based on a 30-day period of observation for
patients whose symptoms are considered infrequent enough that it would be
unlikely that a cardiac arrhythmic event would be captured by a rhythm strip or
24-hour continuous EKG waveform recording and storage or computerized monitoring
device. To properly bill for CPT 93268 or any of the components (CPT 93270,
93271, or 93272), a monitoring service must be available 24-hours per day, 7
days a week, to allow the patient to report any activation of the monitor.
Twenty-four hour coverage means that there must be, at the monitoring site (or
sites) an experienced EKG technician receiving calls; tape recording devices do
not meet this requirement. Further, such technicians should have immediate
access to a physician, and have been instructed in when and how to contact
available facilities to assist the patient in cases of emergencies. Ambulatory
cardiac monitoring for more than 48 hours up to 21 days by continuous rhythm
recording and storage (Zio patch system) is covered without prior authorization.
This form of
EKG monitoring is ordered only by the patient`s physician as part of an overall
plan of treatment. This monitoring is used to record symptomatic episodes of
rate disturbance.
The patient`s
physician must order the monitoring service. The patient must have seen that
physician within one month of initiating of monitoring. The patient must be
symptomatic.
Codes
Used In This BI:
93268
|
External patient and, when performed, auto activated ECG rhythm derived
event recording...up to 30 days, 24-hour attended monitoring; includes
transmission, physician review and interpretation
|
93270
|
External patient and, when performed, auto activated ECG rhythm derived
event recording...up to 30 days, 24-hour attended monitoring; recording
|
93271
|
External patient and, when performed, auto activated ECG rhythm derived
event recording...up to 30 days, 24-hour attended monitoring;
transmission download and analysis
|
93272
|
External patient
and, when performed, auto activated ECG rhythm derived event
recording...up to 30 days, 24-hour attended monitoring; physician review
and interpretation
|
0296T
|
External
electrocardiographic recording for more than 48 hours up to 21 days by
continuous rhythm recording and storage; recording (includes connection
and initial recording) (code deleted eff 01-01-2021 and replaced by
93241, 93242, 93243, 93244, 93245, 93246, 93247, 93248)
|
0297T
|
External
electrocardiographic recording for more than 48 hours up to 21 days by
continuous rhythm recording and storage; scanning analysis with report
(code deleted eff 01-01-2021 and replaced by 93241, 93242, 93243, 93244,
93245, 93246, 93247, 93248)
|
0298T
|
External
electrocardiographic recording for more than 48 hours up to 21 days by
continuous rhythm recording and storage; review and interpretation.
(code deleted eff 01-01-2021 and replaced by 93241, 93242, 93243, 93244,
93245, 93246, 93247, 93248) 0295T - External electrocardiographic
recording for more than 48 hours up to 21 days by continuous rhythm
recording and storage; includes recording, scanning analysis with
report, review and interpretation (code deleted eff 01-01-2021 and
replaced by 93241, 93242, 93243, 93244, 93245, 93246, 93247, 93248)
|
93241
|
External electrocardiographic recording for more than 48
hours up to 7 days by continuous rhythm recording and storage; includes
recording, scanning analysis with report, review and interpretation (new
code 01-01-2021)
93242 External electrocardiographic recording for more
than 48 hours up to 7 days by continuous rhythm recording and storage;
recording (includes connection and initial recording) (new code
01-01-2021)
|
93243
|
External electrocardiographic recording for more than 48
hours up to 7 days by continuous rhythm recording and storage; scanning
analysis with report (new code 01-01-2021
|
93244
|
External electrocardiographic recording for more than 48
hours up to 7 days by continuous rhythm recording and storage; review
and interpretation (new code 01-01-2021)
|
93245
|
External electrocardiographic recording for more than 7
days up to 15 days by continuous rhythm recording and storage; includes
recording, scanning analysis with report, review and interpretation (new
code 01-01-2021)
|
93246
|
External electrocardiographic recording for more than 7
days up to 15 days by continuous rhythm recording and storage; recording
(includes connection and initial recording) (new code 01-01-2021)
|
93247
|
External electrocardiographic recording for more than 7
days up to 15 days by continuous rhythm recording and storage; scanning
analysis with report (new code 01-01-2021)
|
93248
|
External electrocardiographic recording for more than 7 days up to 15
days by continuous rhythm recording and storage; review and
interpretation (new code 01-01-2021)
|
|
Limits
|
This device is not covered when used in clinics, nursing homes, hospitals,
ambulatory surgery centers, or other facilities for the routine transmission of
electrocardiograms or rhythm strips or monitoring of patients.
|
Background
|
Cardiac event recording is a well-established technique for evaluating symptoms
compatible with arryhthmia when symptoms occur too infrequently to be captured
on 24-hour Holter monitoring.
AEMs are a well-established technology that are most typically used to evaluate
episodes of cardiac symptoms (palpitations, dizziness, syncope), which, due to
their infrequency, would escape detection on a standard 24- to 48-hour Holter
monitor. Other proposed uses include monitoring the efficacy of antiarrhythmic
therapy and evaluating ST segment changes as an indication of myocardial
ischemia. However evidence is inadequate to validate these uses of AEMs.
Although serial EKG monitoring has often been used to guide antiarrhythmic
therapy in patients with symptomatic sustained ventricular arrhythmias or
survivors of near sudden cardiac death (DiMarco, 1990), it is not known what
level of reduction of arrhythmic events constitute successful drug therapy.
Furthermore, the patient’s cardiac activity must be evaluated before and during
treatment, such that the patient can serve as his or her own control. The
routine monitoring of asymptomatic patients after myocardial infarction is
additionally controversial, especially after the Cardiac Arrhythmia Suppression
Trial (CAST) showed that patients treated with encainide or flecainide actually
had a higher mortality. While Holter monitoring has been used to detect ST
segment changes, it is unclear whether ST segment changes can be reliably
detected by an AEM. The interpretation of ST segment change is limited by
instability of the isoelectric line, which is in turn dependent on meticulous
attention to skin preparation, electrode attachment, and measures to reduce
cable movement.
In 1999, the American College of Cardiology (ACC) in conjunction with the
American Heart Association (AHA) published guidelines for the use of ambulatory
electrocardiography. These guidelines did not make an explicit distinction
between continuous (i.e., Holter monitor) and intermittent (i.e., ambulatory
event monitor) monitoring. Regarding the effectiveness of antiarrhythmic
therapy, the ACC guidelines list one Class I* indication: “To assess
antiarrhythmic drug response in individuals in whom baseline frequency of
arrhythmia has been well characterized as reproducible and of sufficient
frequency to permit analysis.” The guidelines do not specify whether Holter
monitoring or ambulatory event monitors are most likely to be used. However, the
accompanying text notes that intermittent monitoring may be used to confirm the
presence of an arrhythmia during symptoms. This indication is addressed in the
first policy statement above, i.e., evaluation of symptomatic patients. There
were no Class I indications for detection of myocardial ischemia. In addition,
there were no Class I indications for ambulatory monitoring to assess risk for
future cardiac events in patients without symptoms of arrhythmia. This latter
category would suggest that routine monitoring of patients after myocardial
infarction to detect nonsustained ventricular tachycardia as a risk factor for
sudden cardiac death is not routinely recommended. As noted in a review article
by Zimetbaum and Josephson, 1999, there is a paucity of data to document the
impact on the final health outcomes, and, furthermore, it is not clear at what
point after a myocardial infarction such monitoring would be optimal.
Several studies, including an analysis of a database of 100,000 patients,
compared the diagnostic yield of automatic and patient-activated arrhythmia
recordings, and reported an improved yield with auto-triggering devices. (Ermis
C, 2003; Reiffel JA, 2005; Balmelli N, 2003) One comparative study of 50
patients noted that auto-activation may result in a large number of
inappropriately stored events. (Ng E , 2004) The policy statement does not
distinguish whether the device used is auto- or patient-activated.
Rothman and colleagues recently reported results comparing MCOT to standard loop
recording. (10 Rothman SA, 2007) This study involved 305 patients who were
randomized to the LOOP recorder or MCOT and who were monitored for up to 30
days. The unblinded study enrolled patients at 17 centers for whom the
investigators had a strong suspicion of an arrhythmic cause of symptoms
including those with symptoms of syncope, presyncope, or severe palpitations
occurring less frequently than once per 24 hours and a nondiagnostic 24-hour
Holter or telemetry monitor within the prior 45 days. Test results were read in
a blinded fashion by an electrophysiologist. Study exclusions were Class IV
heart failure, myocardial infarction within the prior 3 months, unstable angina,
history of sustained ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation, and
complex ectopy with an ejection fraction less than 35%.
While 305 patients were randomized, results from 266 were analyzed using
patients who completed at least 25 days of monitoring, 132 in the LOOP group and
134 in the MCOT group. Of the 39 patients who did not complete the protocol, 20
(13 MCOT and 7 LOOP) did not complete the study due to non-compliance
(non-wearing) with the device. Patients were predominantly female with a mean
age of 56 years. Approximately 20% had a history of heart disease, 50%
hypertension, and 5% heart failure.
A
diagnostic endpoint (confirmation/exclusion of arrhythmic cause of symptoms) was
found in 88% of MCOT patients and 75% of LOOP patients (p = 0.008). The
difference in rates was due primarily to detection of asymptomatic (not
associated with simultaneous symptoms) arrhythmias in the MCOT group consisting
of rapid atrial fibrillation and/or flutter (15 patients vs. 1 patient) and
ventricular tachycardia defined as more than 3 beats and rate greater than 100
(14 patients vs. 2 patients). These were thought to be clinically significant
rhythm disturbances and the likely causes of the patients’ symptoms. The paper
does not comment on the clinical impact (changes in management) of these
findings in patients for whom the rhythm disturbance did not occur
simultaneously with symptoms. In this study, the median time to diagnosis in the
total study population was 7 days in the MCOT group and 9 days in the LOOP
group. Of note, prior studies of the auto trigger loop recorder have also shown
similar findings that are viewed as improvements over traditional LOOP
recordings that require patient activation.
A
subset of only 50 patients (related to device availability) received the newer
auto trigger loop recorders. This study protocol does not allow for adequate
comparisons between the auto trigger and the MCOT device.
The auto trigger loop recorders have become a part of the standard diagnostic
approach to patients who have infrequent symptoms that are thought likely to be
due to arrhythmias. Therefore, this is the test to which newer technologies must
be compared. Currently, the literature does not provide any adequate comparative
data for the auto trigger device compared to mobile cardiac telemetry. Further
study of MCOT is needed to replicate the Rothman study and to compare MCOT with
the auto trigger loop recorder.
|
Reference
|
Addendum:
Effective
06/01/2019:
Zio patch ambulatory cardiac monitoring (0296T,
0297T and 0298T) is covered without prior
authorization.
Effective
01-01-2021:
Deleted codes
0295T, 0296T, 0297T and 0298T and replaced by 93241, 93242, 93243, 93244, 93245,
93246, 93247, 93248 – added new codes to search box as well as their
descriptions in the codes used in this BI.
|
Application to Products
|
This policy applies to all health plans administered by QualChoice, both those insured by QualChoice and those that are self-funded by the sponsoring employer, unless there is indication in this policy otherwise or a stated exclusion in your medical plan booklet. Consult the individual plan sponsor Summary Plan Description (SPD) for self-insured plans or the specific Evidence of Coverage (EOC) for those plans insured by QualChoice. In the event of a discrepancy between this policy and a self-insured customer’s SPD or the specific QualChoice EOC, the SPD or EOC, as applicable, will prevail. State and federal mandates will be followed as they apply.
|
Changes: QualChoice reserves the right to alter, amend, change or supplement benefit interpretations as needed.
|
|