Home / Conditions / Cardiac Valve Dis
Cardiac Valve Dis: when insurers say no, reviewers often say yes
In 46 published external-review decisions involving cardiac valve dis, independent physician reviewers overturned the insurer’s denial 52.2% of the time.
Published decisions
46
2001–2026
Overturned
52.2%
24 denials reversed
Most-fought treatments for cardiac valve dis
What insurers denied — and how those fights ended.
| Category | Decisions | Overturned |
|---|---|---|
| Card Valve Repl | 12 | 75% |
| CT Scan | 5 | 40% |
| Surgery | 4 | 75% |
What the insurer actually argued
Denials fall into different categories, and they don’t succeed equally — so the reason on your letter changes how you should answer it.
| Reason given | Decisions | Overturned |
|---|---|---|
Experimental/Investigational The plan called the treatment unproven. These turn on published evidence, so the appeal is a literature argument. | 26 | 57.7% |
Medical Necessity The plan said the care wasn’t medically necessary. The most common fight, and the most winnable. | 20 | 45% |
Typical time to a decision
14 days
Most land between 7 and 21 days
Handled as urgent
47.8%
Expedited when a delay would cause harm
What the reviewers wrote
Excerpts from the independent reviewers’ published findings — the actual reasoning, quoted, not summarised.
Where the denial was overturned
Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: An enrollee has requested authorization and coverage for transcatheter aortic valve replacement with prosthetic valve, percutaneous femoral artery approach.Findings: Two out of three physician reviewers found that the medical evidence supports the requested services in this clinical setting. The medical records demonstrate that the patient has symptomatic aortic stenosis, based on recent onset symptoms of dyspnea with limited (1 block or incline) exertion, fatigue and dizziness, and she therefore has Class II heart failure symptoms. The patient had a recent transthoracic echocardiogram (TTE) which revealed moderately severe to severe aortic stenosis secondary to a bicuspid valve.
Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: An enrollee has requested authorization and coverage for transcatheter closure of a patent foramen ovale (PFO) using a cardiac occlusion device. As noted in the medical literature, PFO can be a benign finding, but in some patients, the PFO can be associated with stroke and systemic embolization. Percutaneous closure of the PFO in patients with cryptogenic stroke has been undertaken for a number of years. Recent randomized controlled clinical trials have demonstrated that closure of PFO in patients with cryptogenic stroke has been associated with reduced rates of recurrent stroke.
Where the denial was upheld
Worth reading too — these show what an appeal has to overcome.
Findings: The physician reviewer found that Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: A patient has requested reimbursement for a heart monitor. In this case, if cardiac monitoring were thought to be indicated to evaluate for palpitations, then non-real time (off-line) monitoring devices such as extended (48 hour) Holter monitoring or off-line event monitoring should be sufficient for the identification of both symptomatic and asymptomatic dysrhythmias including atrial fibrillation. Continuous off-line 24-to-48 hour Holter monitoring should be able to effectively identify symptomatic or asymptomatic dysrhythmias that occur frequently. Likewise, self-activated non-real time and non-continuous monitoring devices (event recorders) should be effective at recording symptomatic dysrhythmias during less frequent symptoms.
Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: An enrollee has requested authorization and coverage for transcatheter mitral valve replacement. There is a lack of formal guidelines or consensus statements available to support treatment with transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve replacement for treatment of this patient’s bioprosthetic mitral valve failure. Urena and colleagues noted that patients may be eligible for transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve replacement if “they are symptomatic, they are considered at high surgical risk, and their anatomy is suitable.” However, the available clinical trials comparing transcatheter mitral valve-in-valve replacement and surgical mitral valve replacement have not reported superior health outcomes with transcatheter approach. The U.S.
Figures and quotations on this page come from 42,749 published decisions in the California DMHC Independent Medical Review dataset. These are California outcomes — every state runs an equivalent external review, but the rates here are California’s. Excerpts are quoted verbatim from the public record and describe this condition generally, not any individual case.
How to use this in your appeal
These outcomes come from California’s external review program — an independent physician panel whose decision binds the insurer. Every state has an equivalent, and internal appeals succeed even more often. If your care for cardiac valve dis was denied, the published record says the denial is worth fighting.
SOURCE: CALIFORNIA DMHC INDEPENDENT MEDICAL REVIEW OUTCOMES (CHHS OPEN DATA) · DERIVED AGGREGATE STATISTICS ONLY · METHODOLOGY
Not legal or medical advice. Coverage Rights is a self-help tool that helps you prepare your own appeal. For advice about your specific situation, talk to a licensed attorney or your doctor.