
Peripheral vascular disease (PVD) reimbursement is fraught with potential compliance pitfalls. With increased scrutiny and worrisome statistics about improper payments, healthcare providers must identify and mitigate any PVD compliance risks that could jeopardize their operations.
This expert-written blog addresses the pressing concern of compliance risks in PVD reimbursement. It provides insights into regulatory trends, recent investigations and best practices.
Equip yourself with the knowledge to navigate this complex environment and safeguard your organization’s reputation and financial sustainability. Learn effective strategies to mitigate compliance risks in peripheral vascular reimbursement by focusing on medical necessity and adherence to guidelines.
What’s your compliance risk when it comes to reimbursement for specific medical procedures like peripheral vascular interventions (PVD)?
Hospitals, health systems and medical practices providing peripheral vascular procedures should be aware of recent scrutiny of these services by government enforcement agencies.
What Therapies Target Peripheral Vascular Disease?
Peripheral vascular disease can result in the narrowing or blockage of arteries in the periphery, such as the lower extremities. There are many different therapies to address PVD, including the typical first-line treatment of lifestyle changes and medications. Lifestyle changes include quitting smoking, eating a healthy diet low in saturated fats, regular exercise and weight management. Some PVD medications include the statin class of drugs, antiplatelet agents, ACE inhibitors and others.
If lifestyle changes and medications don’t work, and certain clinical criteria are met, patients can undergo peripheral vascular procedures. These are minimally invasive procedures intended to improve blood flow through the arteries. Angioplasties, atherectomies and placement of stents are types of peripheral vascular procedures.
OIG Looks at Compliance Risk in PVD Reimbursement
Enforcement agencies are concerned with the increasing volume of these procedures. The problem relates to suspicions that some clinicians perform these procedures when they’re not medically necessary.
The HHS OIG has added two different projects to their work plan related to peripheral vascular procedures. The first is “Utilization of Peripheral Vascular Procedures and CMS’s Related Program Integrity Efforts.” They report that in one calendar year, Medicare paid more than $600 million for atherectomies and angioplasties in peripheral arteries with and without a stent.

Editor’s Note: The Work Plan is a guide to OIG priorities around oversight and compliance. By reviewing the Work Plan, health systems can identify potential compliance risks and proactively take action to mitigate them.
Fraud Concerns Over Vascular Reimbursement Volume
The OIG also states that both CMS and whistleblower fraud investigations have identified these surgeries as vulnerable to improper payments. This particular project is designed to determine trends in Medicare fee-for-service for surgeries in peripheral arteries over several years and identify paid claims that exhibit questionable characteristics.
The OIG will also describe program integrity activities that CMS and its contractors have taken to combat fraud, waste and abuse specific to procedures in peripheral arteries. The report is expected to be issued in 2026.
Understanding Medicare Compliance for Vascular Interventions
The second work plan project is named “Medicare Payments for Lower Extremity Peripheral Vascular Procedures.” The OIG reports that peripheral vascular procedures in an office setting have increased among the Medicare population over the past decade.
In fact, OIG says for calendar years 2022 and 2023, Medicare paid approximately $1.16 billion for lower extremity peripheral vascular procedures in office settings. Their concern is that these procedures are generally recommended only after patients have exhausted medical and exercise therapy and have lifestyle-limiting symptoms.
The OIG plans to analyze Medicare fee-for-service for peripheral vascular procedures for questionable characteristics. They would also like to assess whether these procedures complied with CMS requirements and met applicable treatment guidelines. This report is expected to be released in 2025 under report number W-00-24-35914.
Whistleblower Fraud Investigations Find Compliance Issues
The OIG reported that there have been some whistleblower fraud investigations concerning these procedures. One case recently occurred in Florida where the whistleblower was a physician who claimed a vascular center and its providers were performing and billing for medically unnecessary peripheral vascular procedures.
The government intervened in the case and alleged the providers submitted false claims to Medicare for percutaneous transluminal angioplasties that were not reasonably or medically necessary because they were performed without appropriate diagnostic imaging or clinical justification.
The case was resolved when the medical providers agreed to pay $810,301, of which $337,625 was restitution. The defendants also agreed to pay $85,000 for the whistleblower’s reasonable expenses, including attorneys’ fees and costs.

Report: Faster Treatment, Higher Costs with Office Procedures
The Journal of Vascular Surgery published a report in June 2024 that concluded Medicare patients with peripheral artery disease are treated more quickly but undergo higher cost interventions in office-based laboratories compared to outpatient hospital settings.
The authors used publicly available Medicare fee-for-service claims data spanning a five-year period that identified all patients undergoing certain peripheral procedures for certain conditions. They then evaluated the associations of patient and procedure characteristics with the site of service.
Steps for Compliance in Peripheral Vascular Reimbursement
So, what’s a compliance officer to do? The first step is to determine the level of involvement the organization has in these particular procedures.
If found to be significant, it’s probably wise to evaluate the clinical guidelines and policies in place for use of peripheral vascular procedures. Most organizations have a medical director or department chair who could guide a review to determine if procedures are medically necessary.
Seek Out External Resources about PVD Compliance
Alternatively, seeking external expertise is also an option. Though professional societies’ clinical practice guidelines are not the “end-all,” it might be useful to reference such guidelines as a starting point.
These might include:
Best Practices for Peripheral Vascular Procedure Compliance
Most compliance programs only perform medical coding reviews of the procedure documentation, but the OIG suggests including medical necessity audits as well. In their General Compliance Program Guidance (GCPG) document, they state, “Medicare requires, as a condition of payment, that items and services be medically reasonable and necessary.
“Therefore, entities should ensure that any claims reviews and audits include a review of the medical necessity of the item or service by an appropriately credentialed clinician. Entities that do not include clinical review of medical necessity in their claims audits may fail to identify important compliance concerns relating to medical necessity.”
Given this, compliance professionals shouldn’t ignore the question of medical necessity for peripheral artery procedures. Scrutiny of these services continues to be a priority for the OIG and their work plan as well as the Department of Justice, as evidenced by cases that result either from data analytics or whistleblowers.
Confident Compliance Starts Now
YouCompli customers are confident in their approach to compliance challenges like managing PVD reimbursement. Learn more about the unique combination of expert human analysis and digital compliance management tools.
CJ Wolf, MD, M.Ed. is a healthcare compliance professional with over 22 years of experience in healthcare economics, revenue cycle, coding, billing, and healthcare compliance. He has worked for Intermountain Healthcare, the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, the University of Texas System, an international medical device company and a healthcare compliance software start up. Currently, Dr. Wolf teaches and provides private healthcare compliance and coding consulting services as well as training.


- One Compliance Pro’s Regulatory Change Management Process
- Five ways to show how healthcare Compliance delivers value
- 12 key metrics for compliance officers looking to…
- Transforming Compliance to a Department of Yes
- Exclusion Screening Failure Causes Compliance Nightmare
- Revenue Cycle Management Compliance: Ensuring…
- 5 Strategies for Compliance Accountability Across…
- Three Strategies to Align Compliance with Revenue Cycle
- Polish Your Quality Education Program
- Elevate Healthcare Quality Training: Focus, Not Filler