Radiofreq Ablat denials: what the review data shows

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.

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.

Where the denial was upheld

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.

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.

These are outcomes from California’s external review program — an independent physician panel that binds the insurer. Every state has an equivalent process, and internal appeals succeed even more often. Cite the outcome record for Radiofreq Ablatwhen you appeal: reviewers routinely find that denials like yours didn’t hold up.