Eclampsia
Legacy Content
This page is about the pre-ICD10 diagnosis coding schema. See the ICD10 Diagnosis List, or the following for similar diagnoses in ICD10:Click Expand to show legacy content.
| edit dx infobox | |
| Category/Organ System: |
Category: Cardiovascular (old) |
|
Type: |
[[:Category: Medical Problem (old)]][[Category: Medical Problem (old)]] |
| Main Diagnosis: | Eclampsia |
| Sub Diagnosis: | ECLAMPSIA (see 876 or 878 for post OP) |
| Diagnosis Code: | 12600 - Eclampsia |
| Comorbid Diagnosis: | No |
| Charlson Comorbid coding (pre ICD10): | 0 |
| Program: | CC & Med |
| Status: | Current
|
- To differentiate Eclampsia from Pre-eclampsia: the pt must have had a seizure to have eclampsia.
- Eclampsia refers to seizures in pregnancy that are not related to a pre-existing brain condition.
NOTE:
- Pre-eclampsia is a medical condition in which hypertension arises in pregnancy (pregnancy-induced hypertension) in association with significant amounts of protein in the urine.
- it refers to a set of symptoms rather than any causative factor, and there are many different causes for the condition. It appears likely that there are substances from the placenta that can cause endothelial dysfunction in the maternal blood vessels of susceptible women.[1] While blood pressure elevation is the most visible sign of the disease, it involves generalized damage to the maternal endothelium, kidneys, and liver, with the release of vasoconstrictive factors being secondary to the original damage.
Multiple codes
Question: I have been reviewing the diagnostic codes lately and the eclampsia code seems to be all over the place. Eclampsia is listed 3 times in our diagnostic codes (126, 876 and 878). Because the definition is basically seizures I am not sure why it is listed in the cardiovascular codes. Pre-eclampsia could be put in the cardiovascular codes because it presents mostly as hypertension. However, we don't even have a pre-eclampsia code. Pre-eclampsia is much more common than eclampsia. I think you could put both in the "other medical section" which includes peri partum and post partum problems and this would be sufficient. I would take eclampsia out of the cardiovascular section altogether. What does everyone think?--LKolesar 10:38, 2014 July 18 (CDT)
- I would interpret that if the pt has not delivered the baby or is not in labor, that is, they are pre-natal then we would 126, as the other eclampsias are for peri and post partum states.
- Peri partum includes before and after delivery and it still is not appropriate to have a neurological condition listed under cardiovascular in any event. --LKolesar 12:01, 2014 July 25 (CDT)
- Some of this was also mentioned in Organizational Suggestions several years ago. I think we were hoping for the new dx codes to come much sooner, which will take car of this. Thanks for pointing out that several places exist for this, I am updating the wiki to make sure they are all there; some of the sub-codes were not part of the original import into the wiki and we are still finding them occasionally and fixing them. So, added the codes to Peripartum Problems and Postpartum problems other. That doesn't answer your concerns, just getting some ducks in a row in case we decide to change categorization. From the programming/data side it would not be hard to change the categorization. - Ttenbergen 10:02, 2014 July 21 (CDT)
- We are aware of this issues for this code and others. Note: When we move to new code system this will be fixed. For the purpose of any requests for reports, statistician pulls all 3 codes.
- Some of this was also mentioned in Organizational Suggestions several years ago. I think we were hoping for the new dx codes to come much sooner, which will take car of this. Thanks for pointing out that several places exist for this, I am updating the wiki to make sure they are all there; some of the sub-codes were not part of the original import into the wiki and we are still finding them occasionally and fixing them. So, added the codes to Peripartum Problems and Postpartum problems other. That doesn't answer your concerns, just getting some ducks in a row in case we decide to change categorization. From the programming/data side it would not be hard to change the categorization. - Ttenbergen 10:02, 2014 July 21 (CDT)