General concept: Choose CPT based on what you did (ureteroscopy/pyeloscopy, lithotripsy, stent, etc.).

Common ureteroscopy/lithotripsy codes (examples)

• 52353 – Ureteroscopy with ureteral/renal pelvic lithotripsy
• 52356 – Ureteroscopy with lithotripsy and indwelling ureteral stent insertion

Q3 2026: reporting the additional suction/aspiration work

• Physician reporting is unchanged: the new facility codes (C8014, C9761) are HOPD/ASC codes and do not apply to physician claims. Physicians continue to report 52353 or 52356.
• For the additional work associated with suction/steerable vacuum aspiration, providers may report either the unlisted procedure CPT 53899 (By Report) or append modifier -22 to 52353 / 52356 to indicate that the work performed was greater than typically required.
• Box 19: add a short description of the extra work performed to Box 19 of the claim to assist in proper processing by the payer.
• Be prepared to provide clinical documentation if requested by the payer.

Medicare national average payment (2026 MPFS): 52353 approx. $344; 52356 approx. $365. Actual payment varies by geography and payer.

Documentation language that helps:

• State lithotripsy performed (laser, etc.).
• Stent usage (placed vs not placed; laterality if relevant).
• Describe stone burden/location and outcome (residual fragments, stone-free intent, etc.).
• Describe aspiration/evacuation workflow (e.g., suction via access sheath system) clearly, scope size and type/make.

• N20.0 – Calculus of kidney
• N20.1 – Calculus of ureter
• N20.2 – Calculus of kidney with calculus of ureter

Documentation should include a clear and accurate clinical description of the procedure performed and the name(s) of the device(s) used.

• Modifier Use

  • Modifier -59 (-XS) may be required when performing multiple stone procedures.
    Note: You may not report codes 52356 and 52353 on the same side with a -59 (-XS) modifier.
  • Modifier -22 is used when a procedure requires significantly more effort than usual.

    Example of Modifier 22 in Practice

    Scenario: Steerable Ureteroscopy with Suction Technology

    Standard procedure: Breaking stones with laser, relying on natural clearance.

    Enhanced procedure: Using suction to actively remove stone fragments, requiring additional laser work and extended scope manipulation.

    Documentation: "The procedure required 2 times the amount of operative time than the normal time to ensure a completely clear the kidney due to the number of stones, the structure of the stones resulting in irregular fracture and the anatomy of the kidney. Additional operative time was required to fully explore and evacuate stone burden, reducing post-op complications and risk of repeat stone formation."

    Justification: This extra effort places the procedure in the statistical 'tail' of the standard bell curve, warranting higher reimbursement.

    Alternative: the unlisted procedure CPT 53899 (By Report) may be reported instead of appending modifier -22; add a short description of the extra work to Box 19 of the claim.

  • Modifiers -LT and -RT
    • Are required when a bilateral organ, such as the kidneys or ureters, is involved and a procedure is performed on only one side.
    • Are applied to unilateral procedures to differentiate between treatment on the left and right kidney or ureter.
  • Modifier -50 Bilateral
    • Use when identical service is provided on both the right and left during the same encounter.
    • Report "1" unit when using modifier -50 per current ANSI standards; fee may be increased to support expected increase in reimbursement.
    • Some payers may require alternative reporting including use of 2 lines with RT and LT on separate lines.
    • Check with payer for appropriate bilateral reporting.

• Global Period Awareness

  • Most kidney stone procedures have a 0-day global period. (Exceptions are the ESWL and PCNL procedures which have 90-day global periods.)

• Common Physician-Side Pitfalls

  • Underspecifying the work: "URS with suction" without clarifying lithotripsy, renal vs ureteral location, or outcome.
  • Stent ambiguity: stent placed but not clearly documented (or vice versa).
  • Inconsistent terminology: shorthand in the op note that doesn't map to clean claims language.
  • Assuming facility edits don't affect you: facility denials often trigger rebilling cycles and physician AR delays.

Please see the Q3 2026 decision guidance above for code selection

• C8014 – HOOVER FANS with a standard (non-suction-integrated) ureteroscope.
• C9761 – suction-integrated ureteroscope or steerable ureteral catheter used (with or without HOOVER FANS); never on the same claim as C8014.
• 52353 / 52356 – payers that do not recognize the C codes.
• C1747 / C1889 – device codes per payer instruction (see device-code guidance above).

ASC and HOPD (outpatient) diagnosis reporting: Report ICD-10-CM diagnosis codes that reflect the reason for the encounter/surgery and code to the highest level of specificity supported by the medical record (use all applicable characters; include laterality/associated conditions when available). In the outpatient setting, the first-listed diagnosis is used in lieu of an inpatient "principal diagnosis."

For outpatient surgery (same-day surgery), code the reason for the surgery as the first-listed diagnosis even if the procedure is not performed due to a contraindication. If a definitive diagnosis is not established, do not code "probable/suspected/rule out" conditions—code the signs/symptoms or the condition(s) actually confirmed, and report additional diagnoses that affect care as secondary diagnoses.

Common Kidney/Ureter ICD-10 Codes:

• N20.0 – Calculus of kidney
• N20.1 – Calculus of ureter
• N20.2 – Calculus of kidney with calculus of ureter

How HOOVER FANS Affects Facility Reporting (Q3 2026)

As of July 1, 2026: use of a suction-enabled ureteral access sheath now drives code selection (C8014 vs C9761 vs 52353/52356), so the facility record must clearly support which devices were used and how.

Facility risk points (where denials happen):

• Facility documentation is generic ("suction used") without clearly supporting what procedure elements were performed.
• Supply/device documentation is missing or doesn't match the charge capture record.
• Physician op-note and facility record tell different stories (procedure elements, laterality, stent, outcomes).
• Physician note does not include equipment/device used during the procedure.

Bottom line: Physician documentation of the procedure and equipment is key to facility reimbursement. Any codes billed by the facility must be supported by the documentation.

Facility Documentation: What to Capture

To reduce denials and rework, ensure the facility record clearly captures:

• Procedure elements: cystourethroscopy + ureteroscopy/pyeloscopy + lithotripsy performed (as applicable).
• Stone location/burden and outcomes: renal pelvis/calyces involvement and clearance intent.
• Fragment evacuation: clear statement of fragment evacuation/aspiration workflow (e.g., active suction via access sheath system).
• Device identity: name the suction-enabled access sheath (HOOVER FANS) and the scope used, including whether the scope is suction-integrated — this is what distinguishes C8014 from C9761.
• Stent status: placed vs not placed; laterality and device specifics per facility policy.
• Device/supply capture: HOOVER FANS device/supply documentation should match the supply log and charge capture record.
• Record alignment: physician op note + nursing + supply + charge master match the same story.

Why this matters: when records tell different stories, payers default to denial or downcoding.

Risks (read this before billing C8014 or C9761)

• Code selection risk: C8014 and C9761 describe different device workflows. Billing C9761 for a case performed with a suction sheath and a standard (non-suction-integrated) scope — when C8014 describes that work — invites denial and audit exposure.
• Same-claim restriction: C8014 and C9761 cannot be reported together. If both a suction-integrated scope and a sheath are used, report C9761 only.
• Payer interpretation risk: commercial payers may not recognize the C codes at all, or may tie them to specific devices or workflows. A facility's internal interpretation does not control payer or auditor review.
• Audit and takeback risk: high-dollar and new-technology claims are frequent targets for review. Initial payment does not guarantee long-term retention of funds.
• Documentation mismatch risk: if the physician operative note describes "URS with suction" but the facility bills a code premised on a specific device workflow (suction-enabled sheath for C8014; steerable vacuum aspiration for C9761), the inconsistency of documentation becomes a denial trigger.
• "Suction" alone is weak support: generic suction language does not reliably support the distinct elements implied by either descriptor—all aspects of the reported code must be met and documented.

Practical documentation protections (what helps in the real world)

• Be explicit in the facility record: describe the aspiration workflow (where it occurred—renal pelvis/calyces, what was aspirated—fragments/dust/fluid, and how suction was applied/controlled). Include devices used during the procedure.
• Align every record: physician op note, nursing documentation, supply log, and charge capture should all tell the same procedural story.
• Consider a brief claim or internal narrative: some facilities add a short explanatory note describing the suction-assisted aspiration workflow and devices used, which can help demonstrate transparency if the claim is later reviewed.

Charge Capture Tips: Common Misses That Trigger Denials

• Vague "suction" wording: doesn't support the full procedure narrative (and can create inconsistencies across records).
• Supply not documented: charge posted but not supported by the clinical record or supply log.
• Procedure mismatch: facility record reads like standard URS while other documentation implies different work elements.
• Missing device codes (HOPD): omitting C1747/C1889 on hospital Medicare claims forfeits the cost data CMS uses for future rate-setting.
• Assuming payer parity: commercial policies may not mirror Medicare outpatient treatment.

Operational best practice: add a brief post-op "billing attestation" line confirming the key performed elements and supplies used.