In my view, the latest change to this guideline is the best so far.
The current definition of the root operation Control is “stopping, or attempting to stop, postprocedural or other acute bleeding.”
Since the implementation of ICD-10-PCS on Oct. 1, 2015, this definition and associated guideline have undergone several revisions. Effective with discharges on and after Oct. 1, 2021, guideline B3.7, Control vs. more specific root operations, is being tweaked yet again. Before delving into what’s new, let’s take a walk down memory lane and see how we got here.
The first change came in fiscal year 2017, and significantly altered how we code for hemorrhage control. The original intent of this root operation was to stop or attempt to stop postprocedural bleeding. In 2017, the definition was expanded to include control of either postprocedural or other acute bleeding, and the guideline was updated to reflect this change. The original guideline went on to state that if an attempt to stop the bleeding is initially unsuccessful and any of the definitive root operations of Bypass, Detachment, Excision, Extraction, Reposition, Replacement, or Resection are performed, that definitive root operation is coded instead.
Differences between the versions are highlighted in bold:
|
FY 2016 |
FY 2017 |
|
B3.7 Control vs. more definitive root operations The root operation Control is defined as “stopping, or attempting to stop, postprocedural bleeding.” If an attempt to stop postprocedural bleeding is initially unsuccessful, and to stop the bleeding requires performing any of the definitive root operations Bypass, Detachment, Excision, Extraction, Reposition, Replacement, or Resection, then that root operation is coded instead of Control. Example: Resection of spleen to stop postprocedural bleeding is coded to Resection instead of Control. |
B3.7 Control vs. more definitive root operations The root operation Control is defined as “stopping, or attempting to stop, postprocedural or other acute bleeding.” If an attempt to stop postprocedural or other acute bleeding is initially unsuccessful, and to stop the bleeding requires performing any of the definitive root operations Bypass, Detachment, Excision, Extraction, Reposition, Replacement, or Resection, then that root operation is coded instead of Control. Example: Resection of spleen to stop bleeding is coded to Resection instead of Control. |
In 2018, what looked like a minor change to the guidelines made another big change to how we code. The addition of the words “such as” indicated this list was not all inclusive, and there could be other root operations used to control bleeding outside of those listed in the guideline. For example, I remember seeing discussion boards around this time discussing the appropriate root operation to use for embolization of an arterial bleed for treatment of a bleeding stomach ulcer. Embolization in this situation is coded as Occlusion, but it’s not on that list.
|
FY 2017 |
FY 2018 |
|
B3.7 Control vs. more definitive root operations The root operation Control is defined as “stopping, or attempting to stop, postprocedural or other acute bleeding.” If an attempt to stop postprocedural or other acute bleeding is initially unsuccessful, and to stop the bleeding requires performing any of the definitive root operations Bypass, Detachment, Excision, Extraction, Reposition, Replacement, or Resection, then that root operation is coded instead of Control. Example: Resection of spleen to stop bleeding is coded to Resection instead of Control. |
B3.7 Control vs. more definitive root operations The root operation Control is defined as “stopping, or attempting to stop, postprocedural or other acute bleeding.” If an attempt to stop postprocedural or other acute bleeding is initially unsuccessful, and to stop the bleeding requires performing a more definitive root operation, such as Bypass, Detachment, Excision, Extraction, Reposition, Replacement, or Resection, then the more definitive root operation is coded instead of Control. Example: Resection of spleen to stop bleeding is coded to Resection instead of Control. |
The 2018 guideline change also left another questionable word in the definition: “initially.” The use of this root operation was supposed to be a secondary attempt to achieve hemostasis, but that was also causing coder confusion. What constitutes an initial unsuccessful attempt? So, in the following year, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) removed that word.
|
FY 2019 |
|
B3.7 Control vs. more definitive root operations The root operation Control is defined as “stopping, or attempting to stop, postprocedural or other acute bleeding.” If an attempt to stop postprocedural or other acute bleeding is initially unsuccessful, and to stop the bleeding requires performing a more definitive root operation, such as Bypass, Detachment, Excision, Extraction, Reposition, Replacement, or Resection, then the more definitive root operation is coded instead of Control. Example: Resection of spleen to stop bleeding is coded to Resection instead of Control. |
In my view, the latest change to this guideline is the best so far. First off, the guideline title is being changed from “Control vs. more definitive root operations” to “Control vs. more specific root operations.” Second, it specifies that this root operation is to be used when the procedure performed to control bleeding is above and beyond normal hemostasis measures considered integral to the primary surgical procedure. Third, it adds language clarifying the use of a more specific root operation rather than Control. And finally, three distinct examples are given to show when the root operation Control is used, when a more specific root operation is used, and when no additional code is necessary.
|
FY 2022 |
|
B3.7 Control vs. more specific root operations The root operation Control is defined as “stopping, or attempting to stop, postprocedural or other acute bleeding.” Control is the root operation coded when the procedure performed to achieve hemostasis, beyond what would be considered integral to a procedure, utilizes techniques (e.g. cautery, application of substances or pressure, suturing or ligation or clipping of bleeding points at the site) that are not described by a more specific root operation definition, such as Bypass, Detachment, Excision, Extraction, Reposition, Replacement, or Resection. If a more specific root operation definition applies to the procedure performed, then the more specific root operation is coded instead of Control. Example: Silver nitrate cautery to treat acute nasal bleeding is coded to the root operation Control. Example: Liquid embolization of the right internal iliac artery to treat acute hematoma by stopping blood flow is coded to the root operation Occlusion. Example: Suctioning of residual blood to achieve hemostasis during a transbronchial cryobiopsy is considered integral to the cryobiopsy procedure and is not coded separately. |
If you’ve been struggling to unpack coding guidance for control of postoperative or acute bleeding, this is your year! It’s frustrating that it sometimes takes several years to get a coding guideline “right,” but I think they’ve finally done it.
UnitedHealthcare (UHC) Medicare Advantage will begin reinforcing denialsbased on its interpretation of the International Classification of Disease, 10 thEdition, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) Excludes 1.(https://www.uhcprovider.com/content/dam/provider/docs/public/policies/medadv-reimbursement/rpub/UHC-MEDADV-RPUB-JAN-2026.pdf) As
H.R. 1 doesn’t directly rewrite ICD-10 or CPT, but it does change the environment in which you’re coding. The impact is mostly indirect – through
Please log in to your account to comment on this article.
Accurately determining the principal diagnosis is critical for compliant billing, appropriate reimbursement, and valid quality reporting — yet it remains one of the most subjective and error-prone areas in inpatient coding. In this expert-led session, Cheryl Ericson, RN, MS, CCDS, CDIP, demystifies the complexities of principal diagnosis assignment, bridging the gap between coding rules and clinical reality. Learn how to strengthen your organization’s coding accuracy, reduce denials, and ensure your documentation supports true medical necessity.
Denials continue to delay reimbursement, increase administrative burden, and threaten financial stability across healthcare organizations. This essential webcast tackles the root causes—rising payer scrutiny, fragmented workflows, inconsistent documentation, and underused analytics—and offers proven, data-driven strategies to prevent and overturn denials. Attendees will gain practical tools to strengthen documentation and coding accuracy, engage clinicians effectively, and leverage predictive analytics and AI to identify risks before they impact revenue. Through real-world case examples and actionable guidance, this session empowers coding, CDI, and revenue cycle professionals to shift from reactive appeals to proactive denial prevention and revenue protection.
Sepsis remains one of the most frequently denied and contested diagnoses, creating costly revenue loss and compliance risks. In this webcast, Angela Comfort, DBA, MBA, RHIA, CDIP, CCS, CCS-P, provides practical, real-world strategies to align documentation with coding guidelines, reconcile Sepsis-2 and Sepsis-3 definitions, and apply compliant queries. You’ll learn how to identify and address documentation gaps, strengthen provider engagement, and defend diagnoses against payer scrutiny—equipping you to protect reimbursement, improve SOI/ROM capture, and reduce audit vulnerability in this high-risk area.
Only ICD10monitor delivers what you need: updates on must-know changes associated with the FY26 IPPS, including new ICD-10-CM/PCS codes, CCs/MCCs, and MS-DRGs, plus insights, analysis and answers to your questions from two of the country’s most respected subject matter experts.
Stay ahead of the 2026-2027 audit surge with “Top 10 Audit Targets for 2026-2027 for Hospitals & Physicians: Protect Your Revenue,” a high-impact webcast led by Michael Calahan, PA, MBA. This concise session gives hospitals and physicians clear insight into the most likely federal audit targets, such as E/M services, split/shared and critical care, observation and admissions, device credits, and Two-Midnight Rule changes, and shows how to tighten documentation, coding, and internal processes to reduce denials, recoupments, and penalties. Attendees walk away with practical best practices to protect revenue, strengthen compliance, and better prepare their teams for inevitable audits.
As AI reshapes healthcare compliance, the risk of biased outputs and opaque decision-making grows. This webcast, led by Frank Cohen, delivers a practical Four-Pillar Governance Framework—Transparency, Accountability, Fairness, and Explainability—to help you govern AI-driven claim auditing with confidence. Learn how to identify and mitigate bias, implement robust human oversight, and document defensible AI review processes that regulators and auditors will accept. Discover concrete remedies, from rotation protocols to uncertainty scoring, and actionable steps to evaluate vendors before contracts are signed. In a regulatory landscape that moves faster than ever, gain the tools to stay compliant, defend your processes, and reduce liability while maintaining operational effectiveness.
Get clear, practical answers to Medicare’s most confusing regulations. Join Dr. Ronald Hirsch as he breaks down real-world compliance challenges and shares guidance your team can apply right away.
Federal auditors are zeroing in on Inpatient Rehabilitation Facility (IRF) and hospital rehab unit services, with OIG and CERT audits leading to millions in penalties—often due to documentation and administrative errors, not quality of care. Join compliance expert Michael Calahan, PA, MBA, to learn the five clinical “pillars” of IRF-PPS admissions, key documentation requirements, and real-life case lessons to help protect your revenue.
Prepare for the 2025 CMS IPPS Final Rule with ICD10monitor’s IPPSPalooza! Click HERE to learn more
Get 15% OFF on all educational webcasts at ICD10monitor with code JULYFOURTH24 until July 4, 2024—start learning today!
CYBER WEEK IS HERE! Don’t miss your chance to get 20% off now until Dec. 1 with code CYBER25
CYBER WEEK IS HERE! Don’t miss your chance to get 20% off now until Dec. 2 with code CYBER24
