Radiofreq Ablat denials in California external review

In the California DMHC record, independent physician reviewers decided 317 published external-review cases involving Radiofreq Ablatand overturned the plan’s denial in 42.9%. That is a historical result among cases that reached this program, not a forecast for an individual appeal.

California DMHC decisions
317
2002–2025
Overturned
42.9%
136 denials reversed

Conditions behind Radiofreq Ablat denials

What insurers denied — and how those fights ended.
CategoryDecisionsOverturned
Back Pain80
37.5%
Varicose Veins33
48.5%
Vertebral Disc Prob15
66.7%
Joint Problem13
30.8%
Thyroid Problems12
91.7%
Osteoarthritis12
50%
Fibroids11
0%
Knee Problem Pain7
42.9%
Uterine Fibroids7
42.9%

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
Experimental/Investigational
The plan called the treatment unproven. These turn on published evidence, so the appeal is a literature argument.
236
37.3%
Medical Necessity
The plan said the care wasn’t medically necessary. The most common fight, and the most winnable.
81
59.3%
Typical time to a decision
16 days
Most land between 7 and 21 days
Handled as urgent
39.1%
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

Physician 1: The patient is a 35-year-old female with bilateral symptomatic varicose veins, worse on the right, with lipodermatosclerosis on her left calf. She has undergone phlebectomy and VNUS closure on the right leg in the past. The patient now has reflux on both legs, with 15 mm varices on the right from the mid-thigh down, and 6 mm varices on the left with reflux. The patient is very symptomatic with skin changes on the right leg, and has used compression stockings for years. The patient’s provider proposed endovenous laser therapy (EVLT) for treatment of the patient’s left leg and possible sclerotherapy on the right leg. The Health Plan has denied authorization and coverage for EVLT on the basis the requested procedure is considered investigational.Review of the relevant data demonstrates EVLT is not an investigational device.
Experimental/Investigational · 2005 · IMR EI05-4887
Physician 1The patient is a 38-year-old woman with bilateral symptomatic venous disease due to greater saphenous vein incompetency. The patient has requested authorization for radiofrequency ablation, which has been denied by the Health Plan on the basis that it is considered investigational in nature.There is now sufficient peer-reviewed, randomized, controlled clinical trials with medium and long-term follow-up to support the use of radiofrequency ablation closure in the treatment of greater saphenous vein incompetence of symptomatic varicose veins. It is as effective as standard surgical therapy and is associated with significantly less rehabilitation and long-term morbidity. Therefore, I have determined that the requested procedure is likely to be more beneficial for treatment of the patient’s medical condition than any available standard therapy.
Experimental/Investigational · 2004 · IMR EI04-3543

Where the denial was upheld

Worth reading too — these show what an appeal has to overcome.
Physician #1: The patient is a 54-year-old male who presented with rectal bleeding in May 2004. He was found to have a 5.0cm circumferential rectal cancer. The CT scan showed a 3.5cm lesion in the liver which was positive on PET scan leading to a diagnosis of stage IV adenocarcinoma of the rectum. He was treated with chemotherapy (FOLFOX plus Avastin) and had a resection of his rectal carcinoma. There was a second operation with resection of his liver metastases and a second round of chemotherapy (FOLFOX) and radiation. A CT scan in July 2005 showed a mass in the right lung. A repeat CT scan and a PET scan showed three nodules in the right lung and one nodule in the left lung. In October 2005 the patient underwent right lower lobectomy and resection of the right middle lobe nodule. The pathology report showed metastatic adenocarcinoma in each specimen.
Experimental/Investigational · 2006 · IMR EI06-5273
Physician 1The patient is a 59-year-old man who had lung surgery in August 2002. At that time he had resection of his right lower lobe, revealing a poorly differentiated squamous cell cancer, 3cm in size, with negative nodes. In March 2003, the patient developed two areas of endobronchial recurrence. He then underwent chemotherapy with little response. An endobronchial biopsy in June 2003 again was positive. The patient was treated with external beam radiation therapy from June 2003 to July 2003. Repeat bronchoscopy in September 2003 showed persistence of one of the lesions and the patient was treated with local brachytherapy to this lesion.In December 2003, CT scan of the chest demonstrated two new pulmonary nodules, each about 1cm in size. One was at the right lung base and the other was in the superior segment of the right lower lobe.
Experimental/Investigational · 2004 · IMR EI04-3521

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 treatment generally, not any individual case.

How to use this in your appeal

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 Radiofreq Ablat, 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

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.

Denied Radiofreq Ablat? Use the California record to prepare.

Explain my denial — freeStart my appeal · $9