Sepsis vs

I have patient with a history of hyperekplexia who was treated as outpt for uti with Bactrim.  He came in because he had been vomiting, not eating, fever 102, occasional chills and syncopal episode and was dx with uti, dehydration and syncope.

H/P says acute renal injury, hyperekplexia with severe muscle cramps.

First progress note says uti, sepsis consider contamination from port, aki. UTI, aki and sepsis have been documented on subsequent notes.

VS are normal (no tachypnea or tachycardia, BP wnl), had the reported temp of 102 at home but  temp has been normal his whole stay.  WBC 11.9, 91 neuts, 10.5 absolute neuts,   Lactic acid and procalcitonin normal. Bld cult showed alpha strep (no sensitivities done).

i asked the doctor if he thought the renal failure was due to sepsis or dehydration or other and he said and documented that the renal failure was due to dehydration.  

He barely qualifies for sepsis being treated with Rocephin.  He was fluid resuscitated for the renal failure and his creatinine improved from 1.81 to .82.  He had neither ID or renal consult.

In this case, do you think Acute Renal Failure could be sequenced as PDx over sepsis?

Comments

  • From the description, I wonder if the sepsis was clinically "ruled out".  The patient does not seem to meet typical criteria for sepsis and unless the Physician documented compelling atypical grounds for making the diagnosis, I would submit a validation query.  Generally, I discuss the reason for these types of queries with the Physician prior to placing it on the chart.  For example "The documentation does not describe any organ dysfunction related to the systemic affects of infection, which is typically present in septic patients.  We are hoping you can add more information or indicate if the Sepsis was ultimately ruled out".  If it turns out sepsis is legitimate, then I think it would be principle.  
    Look forward to other comments,  Always more than one way to approach these complex cases.  
    Beth Wolf, MD
  • Coding Clinic 4th Quarter 2017 pg. 110

    If after querying, the attending physician affirms that a patient has a particular condition in spite of certain clinical parameters not being met, the facility should request the physician document the clinical rationale and be prepared to defend the condition if challenged in an audit. The facility should assign the appropriate code(s) for the conditions documented
    .


  • His rationale was that the patient failed outpatient treatment for UTI, had chills, fever pta of 102 with elevated WBC and bacteremia with quick turn around with IV antibiotics.  I think it is weak, he disagrees, but that's all he has. That is why I was wondering about going with renal failure as PDx.  If the sepsis was present and resolved quickly, and the renal failure was due to the dehydration from vomiting and not drinking, (and not the sepsis), could the failure be sequenced first since it was the focus of  care equally or more so than the 'sepsis'?  Or is everyone in the sepsis first camp?
  • If the MD thinks it is sepsis even after a clinical validation, the sepsis is sequenced first, no matter how weak. 
Sign In or Register to comment.