I don't mind
----- Original Message -----
From: "Patsy Ruegg"
To: ; ;
Cc: "'IHCRG Resource Group (E-mail)'"
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2007 10:05 AM
Subject: [IHCRG] Re: another point on billing codes
> I find this thread interesting and was wondering if I have everyone's
> permission to use this as one of the questions for the NSH IHC Forum?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of
> Richard Cartun
> Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2007 6:49 AM
> To: email@example.com; firstname.lastname@example.org
> Cc: IHCRG Resource Group (E-mail)
> Subject: [IHCRG] Re: another point on billing codes
> Interesting point. We use semiquantitative scoring for ER, PR, and HER2
> performed on primary breast CAs. Therefore, we use 88360x3 for these
> markers whether they are positive or negative.
> Richard W. Cartun, Ph.D.
> Director, Immunopathology & Histology
> Assistant Director, Anatomic Pathology
> Hartford Hospital
> 80 Seymour Street
> Hartford, CT 06102
> (860) 545-1596
> (860) 545-0174 Fax
>>>> "Orr, Rebecca" 08/29/07 7:24 AM >>>
> I'm interested in everyone's input on this thread.
> Charging for Breast cases seems to be as unclear as the processing
> We are now in the process of figuring out charges if the ER PR Her2
> results are negative.
> ER PR Her2 are quantitative (2+, 3+) or semi quantitative (weakly or
> strongly positive, etc)
> Assuming these markers are ordered on a breast cancer (not a benign
> breast), even a negative result is quantitative and contributes to the
> outcome of the therapy., isn't this right?
> Please steer me in the right direction if this is an incorrect point.
> So we are being told by our billing folks that we must change the code
> on the negative resulted ER PR her2 to a lesser charge.
> I can understand if CPT may think doctors are charging on unnecessary
> IHC tests, but they are focusing on the wrong tests.
> (in my opinion).
> A negative or 0 result on these particular markers should NOT be
> synonymous with "
> Quite perplexing and frustrating.
> ---Original Message-----
>> From: email@example.com
>> [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]On Behalf Of Parker,
>> Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 4:25 PM
>> To: email@example.com
>> Subject: [Histonet] CPT codes
>> Hi all,
>> Does anyone know the correct charges to charge a breast lump that
>> be inked. Someone told us we could only charge a -307 if it has
>> in the micro margins. As much gross work is done either way (cancer
>> not) so what is the real truth ? We have given most lumps 305 and I
>> thinking we are undercharging.
>> Helayne Parker, HT (ASCP)
>> Histology Section Head
>> Skaggs Community Health Center
>> Branson, Missouri
> Becky Orr CLA,HT(ASCP)QIHC
> Anatomic Pathology
> Evanston Northwestern Healthcare
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "ihcrg" group.
> To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> For more options, visit this group at
Histonet mailing list