Resources · Guides
Bronchoscopy coding & NCCI bundling guide (2026)
Bronchoscopy is where pulmonology's highest-value claims meet its most technical billing rules. A single scope session can include several procedures, and NCCI bundling edits — not the charge slip — decide what actually gets paid. This guide covers the core code family, how bundling works, and when a modifier is appropriate.
Educational guide, not compliance advice. Verify every code and edit pair against the current AMA CPT code set and the current NCCI edits before billing — bundling relationships change.
The core bronchoscopy code family
| CPT | Procedure | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| 31622 | Diagnostic bronchoscopy | The base procedure; often bundled into add-on work |
| 31623 | Bronchoscopy with brushing | Protected specimen or cytology brushing |
| 31624 | Bronchoscopy with bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) | Distinct from brushing |
| 31625 | Bronchoscopy with endobronchial biopsy | One or more sites |
| 31628 | Bronchoscopy with transbronchial lung biopsy | Single lobe; additional lobe has its own add-on |
| 31629 | Bronchoscopy with transbronchial needle aspiration | Single lobe |
| 31652 / 31653 | EBUS-guided sampling | Structure count drives code selection |
NCCI edits decide what gets paid
The additional procedures in a scope session are not automatic separate payments. NCCI edits bundle some combinations into the base bronchoscopy, allow others to be reported separately, and permit a modifier only where the work was genuinely distinct. Billed wrong in one direction you get a denial; wrong in the other, a compliance exposure. The standard to demand from any biller is edit-pair review on every multi-procedure session before submission — what's separately billable as documented, what needs a modifier, and what the operative note has to say to support it.
When a modifier is appropriate
Modifier 59 — or a more specific X modifier (XE, XP, XS, XU) — reports a distinct procedural service that an edit would otherwise bundle. It is appropriate only when the documentation genuinely supports that the services were separate. Using it reflexively to unbundle is exactly the pattern that draws audits. The operative note, not the desire to be paid, decides whether it applies.
EBUS and the appeal
EBUS and navigational procedures are coded from the documented approach and the number of structures sampled. And when a payer bundles work you believe was distinct, the response isn't a resubmission — it's an appeal that quotes the payer's own bundling policy back with the operative note attached. A biller who writes off bundled bronchoscopy work instead of appealing it is leaving real revenue behind.
Frequently asked questions
How is a diagnostic bronchoscopy coded?
A straightforward diagnostic bronchoscopy is reported with 31622. Additional work performed in the same session — brushing, lavage, biopsy, needle aspiration — has its own codes, subject to bundling rules that determine what's separately payable.
Why did only one bronchoscopy code get paid?
Almost always NCCI bundling: the payer's edits folded additional procedures into the primary. Some bundles are correct; many are appealable when the operative note shows genuinely distinct work. Both the edit pair and the note have to be checked before deciding.
When does modifier 59 apply in bronchoscopy?
Modifier 59 (or a more specific X-modifier) is used to report a distinct procedural service that an edit would otherwise bundle — but only when the documentation supports that the work was separate. It is not a way to force payment on genuinely bundled services.