Home / Conditions / Deep Vein Thrombosis

Deep Vein Thrombosis: when insurers say no, reviewers often say yes

In 27 published external-review decisions involving deep vein thrombosis, independent physician reviewers overturned the insurer’s denial 55.6% of the time.

Published decisions
27
2001–2026
Overturned
55.6%
15 denials reversed

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 givenDecisionsOverturned
Medical Necessity
The plan said the care wasn’t medically necessary. The most common fight, and the most winnable.
17
41.2%
Experimental/Investigational
The plan called the treatment unproven. These turn on published evidence, so the appeal is a literature argument.
7
71.4%
Urgent Care
Expedited reviews, decided in days rather than weeks.
3
100%
Typical time to a decision
21 days
Most land between 7 and 24 days
Handled as urgent
29.6%
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 Factor V Leiden genetic testing. Thrombophilias are hereditary or acquired conditions which can increase the risk of venous or arterial thrombosis (Stevens, et al.). As the etiology of thrombosis is multifactorial, the presence of a thrombophilic defect is only one of many elements that determine a patient’s risk. Factors associated with an inherited thrombophilia include venous thrombotic event at a young age, a strong family history, venous thrombotic event in conjunction with weak provoking factors at a young age, recurrent venous thrombotic event, and venous thrombotic event in an unusual site.
Experimental/Investigational · 2022 · IMR EI22-37656
Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: An enrollee has requested reimbursement for gene test (prothrombin G20210A (Factor II) mutation testing) for evaluation of the enrollee’s deep vein thrombosis. Findings: The 3 physician reviewers found that Data from observational studies report that the highest rates of inheritable thrombotic disorders are in patients with a family history. Testing for the presence of inherited thrombophilias is recommended. Prothrombin G20210A mutation may be suspected in an individual with familial thrombophilia, a known familial prothrombin G20210A mutation, venous thromboembolism (VTE) at an early age or unusual site, or recurrent VTE. As this patient has an extensive VTE and a mother with recurrent VTE. Thus, testing was clinically indicated to for evaluation and treatment.
Experimental/Investigational · 2017 · IMR EI17-25984

Where the denial was upheld

Worth reading too — these show what an appeal has to overcome.
Physician 1: The patient is a 62-year-old male with post-phlebitic syndrome and a history of deep vein thromboses (DVT). He has associated lymphedema and varicose veins secondary to his DVT. The patient has bilateral deep venous incompetence with residual thrombus in his right leg. His provider has requested authorization for endovenous laser ablation and six sessions of ultrasound guided sclerotherapy for both legs. The Health Plan denied the request citing the experimental/investigational nature of the therapy.The patient has symptomatic post-thrombotic syndrome. Interventions on the right greater saphenous vein and multiple varicosities could potentially worsen his condition. Intervention on his left leg may assist his condition. The patient is at high risk for recurrent DVT on the right, irrespective of the modality used.
Experimental/Investigational · 2006 · IMR EI06-5635
Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: The patient has requested authorization and coverage for iliac vein stenting of the right lower extremity. The records provided for review document that this patient has a history of recurrent right lower extremity deep vein thrombosis (DVT). The provider has recommended enrolling the patient in a chronic venous thrombosis relief with adjunctive catheter directed therapy (C-TRACT) randomized controlled trial.
Medical Necessity · 2022 · IMR MN22-38436

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 deep vein thrombosis 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.

Fighting a denial for deep vein thrombosis? 55.6% won.

Explain my denial — freeStart my appeal · $39