Home / Conditions / Intertrigo

Intertrigo: when insurers say no, reviewers often say yes

In 56 published external-review decisions involving intertrigo, independent physician reviewers overturned the insurer’s denial 37.5% of the time.

Published decisions
56
2001–2026
Overturned
37.5%
21 denials reversed

Most-fought treatments for intertrigo

What insurers denied — and how those fights ended.
TreatmentDecisionsOverturned
Panniculectomy30
50%
Typical time to a decision
21 days
Most land between 17 and 22 days
Handled as urgent
5.4%
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 mastopexy (CPT 19371) and breast reduction (CPT 19318). Findings: The physician reviewer found that Cabral and colleagues state that, “Women with increased breast size experience symptoms such as pain in the neck, shoulders and lumbar spine, headache, intertrigo in the inframammary fold, difficulty in performing daily activities, paresthesia in the hands, difficulty in exercising, low self-esteem, and body dissatisfaction.” The American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS) states that reduction mammaplasty authorization should be based on documentation of the severity of the symptoms of macromastia and impact on health-related quality of life with at least two of the following signs: (1) chronic breast pain due to weight of the breasts; (2) intertrigo unresponsive to medical management; (3)…
Medical Necessity · 2021 · IMR MN21-35809
Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: The patient has requested authorization and coverage for (1) surgery to remove excessive skin from bilateral arms and (2) surgery to remove excessive skin from bilateral thighs. Findings: The physician reviewer found that The submitted documentation supports the medical necessity of a portion of the requested services. According to the American Society of Plastic Surgeons, when surgery to remove extensive skin redundancy and fat folds is performed solely to enhance a patient’s appearance in the absence of any signs or symptoms of functional abnormalities, the procedure should be considered cosmetic in nature.
Medical Necessity · 2021 · IMR MN21-35486

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: The patient has requested authorization and coverage for panniculectomy. According to the American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS), when surgery to remove extensive skin redundancy and fat folds is performed solely to enhance a patient’s appearance in the absence of any signs or symptoms of functional abnormalities, the procedure should be considered cosmetic in nature and not a compensable procedure. One study stated that “A panniculectomy must meet specific criteria to be medically necessary. The pannus must hang below the level of the pubis and be confirmed with photography. Patients must fail medical treatment of intertrigo for three months. Medical treatment includes good hygiene, topical antifungals, corticosteroids, and antibiotics. The role of panniculectomy is to restore normal function.
Medical Necessity · 2024 · IMR MN24-40984
Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: The patient has requested authorization and coverage for panniculectomy. According to the American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS), a panniculectomy involves the removal of hanging excess skin and fat in a transverse or vertical wedge but does not include muscle plication, neoumbilicoplasty, or flap elevation. When surgery to remove extensive skin redundancy and fat folds is performed solely to enhance a patient’s appearance in the absence of any signs or symptoms of functional abnormalities, the procedure should be considered cosmetic in nature.
Medical Necessity · 2020 · IMR MN20-34192

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 intertrigo 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 intertrigo? 37.5% won.

Explain my denial — freeStart my appeal · $39