Surgical Fields--Head & Neck: How does one code the removal of benign submandibular and sublingual glands performed during a neck dissection for a head and neck cancer? See discussion.
Should the removal be coded as incidental in the surgical Procedure if the Other Site field? Does it make a difference if the submandibular gland is removed en toto with lymph nodes or if the gland is submitted as a separate specimen? Does it make a difference if the glands are involved?
Removal of the lower salivary glands is part of a radical neck dissection and is not recorded in Surgery of Primary Site or Surgery of Other Site. Radical neck dissection is coded under "Scope of Regional Lymph Node Surgery."
It does not matter whether or not the gland is submitted as a separate specimen. It does not matter whether or not the gland is involved.
Histology (Pre-2007): Do the terms "keratinizing" or "non-keratinizing" have to be present in the final diagnosis to use codes 8071 through 8073? See discussion.
Should "squamous cell carcinoma, small cell variant" be coded to 8073 even though the final diagnoses does not include the phrase "non-keratinizing?"
For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
It is acceptable to assign code 8073/3 for squamous cell carcinoma, small cell, NOS. Code squamous cell carcinoma, large cell, NOS to 8072/3. Code to non-keratinizing unless the pathology report specifies keratinizing.
For tumors diagnosed 2007 or later, refer to the MP/H rules. If there are still questions about how this type of tumor should be coded, submit a new question to SINQ and include the difficulties you are encountering in applying the MP/H rules.
EOD-Extension--Stomach: How is this field coded for a stomach primary that has metastases to "Sister Mary Joseph's Nodes?"
For cases diagnosed 1998-2003: For a stomach primary, code extension to 70 [Abdominal wall]. Sister Mary Joseph's nodule is a cutaneous umbilical metastasis most commonly from an intra-abdominal primary.
This rare form of cutaneous umbilical metastasis results from spread of tumor within the falciform ligament. The umbilicus is part of the abdominal wall.
EOD-Pathological Extension--Prostate: How is this field coded when biopsy findings differ from prostatectomy findings? See Description.
Needle biopsy of prostate clearly states cancer arising in the apex. Clinical extension would then be 33. After prostatectomy, the path report states only one lobe involved with cancer and the apex was negative for cancer. Would the pathological extension then be coded to a 20 to truly reflect the surgical findings?
For cases diagnosed 1998-2003: Combine the information from the needle biopsy and the prostatectomy and code the pathologic EOD to 34 [Extending to the prostatic apex]. The case example above is very similar to Example 4 on page 2 of the Prostate EOD Coding Guidelines.
EOD-Pathologic Extension--Prostate: Is extracapsular extension implied by the phrase "tumor invades the fibrous tissue of the capsule"? See Description.
The physician staged to a pathology stage of T3. It appears the physician regards the following pathology statement to be equivalent to capsular invasion on the right side: "Tumor invades the fibrous tissue of the capsule on the right side where it approaches to within 1 mm. of the surgical margin." Should pathologic extension be coded to 42[unilateral extracapsular extension]?
Use the best information available to stage the case. In this case, the best information is the pathologist's description of the tumor extension rather than the AJCC stage.
For cases diagnosed 1995-2003: Extracapsular extension is not implied by the phrase in the question. Code the capsular involvement described to 32 [invasion into but not beyond the prostatic capsule] on the basis of the pathology report.
EOD-Extension--Head & Neck: Is this field coded 10 [Invasive tumor confined to one of the following subsites: interior wall, one lateral wall, posterior wall] or 30 [Localized, NOS] for tonsillar primary when there is no mention of involvement of surrounding structures? See Description.
Site is stated to be "left tonsil" and was coded to site C099. "The lesion is admixed in tonsillar tissue." No surrounding structures are stated to be involved. Is it logical to assume that since code C099 includes the palantine tonsils and the palatine tonsils are on the lateral wall and since no other areas are stated to be involved that extension code 10 [confined to one lateral wall] would be more appropriate than code 30 [localized NOS]?
For cases diagnosed 1998-2003: Code EOD-extension for the case example to 10 [Invasive tumor confined to one of the following subsites: anterior wall, one lateral wall, posterior wall]. The tonsil lies in a pocket on the wall (tonsillar fossa), so you know it is confined to the wall.
Histology (Pre-2007): How are the following four histologies coded: 1) Adenocarcinoma with focal mucinous adenocarcinoma; 2) Adenocarcinoma with focal areas of bronchioalveolar adenocarcinoma, 3) Mixed infiltrating duct and focal medullary carcinoma, and 4) Mixed infiltrating duct and focal medullary carcinoma? See Description.
1. How do we code colon: Adenocarcinoma with focal Mucinous adenoca? 8140/3 or 8255/3?
2. A lung lesion with predominant adenoca with focal areas of bronchioalveolar adenoca? 8140/3 or 8255/3?
3. Mixed infiltrating duct carcinoma and medullary ca? 8510/3 or 8255/3?
4. Mixed infil duct ca and focal medulary ca? 8510/3 or 8255/3?
For tumors diagnosed prior to 2007:
1. 8140/3, Adenocarcinoma. Mucinous has a specific rule (see sinq 20010075): Include the mucinous component only if it is 50% or more of the tumor. "Focal" is not a majority term.
2. 8250/3, Bronchiolo-alveolar adenoca. Code the more specific histology.
3. 8523/3, Infiltrating duct mixed with other types of carcinoma. Combination of infiltrating duct and another type of carcinoma.
4. 8523/3, Infiltrating duct mixed with other types of carcinoma. Combination of infiltrating duct and another type of carcinoma.
For tumors diagnosed 2007 or later, refer to the MP/H rules. If there are still questions about how this type of tumor should be coded, submit a new question to SINQ and include the difficulties you are encountering in applying the MP/H rules.
EOD-Size of Primary Tumor--Prostate: Is this field coded to the size of a hypoechoic mass identified on a TRUS when there is no tumor size from the prostatectomy specimen?
For cases diagnosed 1998-2003: Ultrasound measurement of a malignancy can be used to code EOD-Size of Primary Tumor. Information on tumor size taken from imaging/radiographic techniques has low priority, just above physical examination.
Grade, Differentiation--Bladder: How is this field coded for a five grade system? See Description.
Example: Invasive, high grade transitional cell carcinoma (Grade 4-5/5)
For this example, code grade as 4 based on the term "High grade." If "high grade" was not stated, the grade would be coded as 9, not determined. There is no SEER translation between the ICD-O grades and a five grade system for bladder. None of the pathololgist experts we querried knew of a five grade system for bladder.
An official website of the United States government
Home