Small Intestinal Bacterial Overgrowth denials in California external review
In the California DMHC record, independent physician reviewers decided 80 published external-review cases involving small intestinal bacterial overgrowthand overturned the plan’s denial in 76.3%. That is a historical result among cases that reached this program, not a forecast for an individual appeal.
Most-fought treatments for small intestinal bacterial overgrowth
| Treatment | Decisions | Overturned |
|---|---|---|
| Xifaxan | 62 | 82.3% |
What the insurer actually argued
| Reason given | Decisions | Overturned |
|---|---|---|
Medical Necessity The plan said the care wasn’t medically necessary. The most common fight, and the most winnable. | 75 | 78.7% |
Experimental/Investigational The plan called the treatment unproven. These turn on published evidence, so the appeal is a literature argument. | 5 | 40% |
What the reviewers wrote
Where the denial was overturned
Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: The patient has been diagnosed with chronic fatigue disorder and fibromyalgia. The patient reported bloating, burping and flatulence. He was noted to have had irritable bowel syndrome (IBS) since he was a teenager. His symptoms initially responded to erythromycin and worsened with dicyclomine. The provider reported concern for small intestinal bacterial overgrowth (SIBO), although testing was not possible due to COVID-19. The provider noted Xifaxan is indicated for the treatment of SIBO. The patient was noted to be allergic to penicillin. The provider noted a delay in treatment is causing the patient stress in the setting of his post-traumatic stress disorder, bipolar disorder, borderline personality disorder, and anxiety. The patient reported the return of abdominal pain after treatment with neomycin.
Nature of Statutory Criteria/ Case Summary: The enrollee is requesting reimbursement for four continuous weeks of Xifaxan. The enrollee has irritable bowel syndrome. He completed a lactulose breath test, which tested positive for hydrogen, resulting in a diagnosis of small intestinal bacterial overgrowth (SIBO). Xifaxan was prescribed for four weeks on the basis that hydrogen is best treated with this medication. The physician notes metronidazole is effective only in treating methane. Cipro and tetracycline have not proven to be effective in treating hydrogen. The patient indicates his condition has improved since starting Xifaxan and continues to improve over time. Literature supports the treatment of small intestinal bacterial overgrowth (SIBO) for patients with irritable bowel syndrome with diarrhea (IBS-D) who are positive for hydrogen on the lactulose breath test.
Where the denial was upheld
Physician 1: This patient is a 54-year-old female who has irritable bowel syndrome, constipation predominant subtype (IBS-C) and apparently was tested for small bowel bacteria with positive results. Her treating physician is now recommending treatment with a recently described antimicrobial regimen of Xifaxan and neomycin in an effort to resolve her bacterial overgrowth and symptoms of IBS-C. The Health Plan has denied coverage for Xifaxan on the basis it is considered investigational for treatment of the patient’s medical condition.The issue of the prevalence and putative association of small intestinal bacterial overgrowth with IBS and functional dyspepsia have been and remain controversial.
Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: The parents of the patient requested Xifaxan 550 mg tablets.Xifaxan may be considered in the treatment of pediatric patients with a diagnosis of small intestinal bacterial overgrowth (SIBO). The use of Xifaxan in treating small intestinal bacterial overgrowth (SIBO) is appropriate and supported by adequate peer-reviewed literature. However, there is no evidence that Xifaxan is superior to the available medications. A study found that Xifaxan treatment seems to be effective and safe for the treatment of SIBO. However, the authors indicated that well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed to substantiate these findings and to establish the optimal regimen.
Figures and quotations on this page come from 42,749 published decisions in the California DMHC Independent Medical Review dataset. These are California external-review outcomes. Other state and federal programs have different eligibility rules, processes, and current availability; the rates here do not transfer to those programs or predict an individual result. Excerpts are quoted verbatim from the public record and describe this condition generally, not any individual case.
These outcomes describe eligible cases completed through California DMHC’s Independent Medical Review program. They do not estimate the chance that an internal appeal, an external review in another jurisdiction, or your individual case will succeed. Use the record to identify evidence patterns involving small intestinal bacterial overgrowth, then check the rights and deadlines that apply to your plan.
SOURCE: CALIFORNIA DMHC INDEPENDENT MEDICAL REVIEW OUTCOMES (CHHS OPEN DATA) · AGGREGATES + DEIDENTIFIED DECISION EXCERPTS/REFERENCE IDS · METHODOLOGY