CO-97 means the payer already paid for this service as part of another payment — your item is considered "included" in something they've already adjudicated. You billed it separately when the payer's rules say it should be wrapped into the primary service payment.
50–75% when the denial is factually incorrect (e.g., oxygen rental past month 36). Appeals citing the wrong bundling rule or using Modifier-59 without documentation: ~25–35%.
Get a tailored CO-97 action plan in 30 seconds.
Run CO-97 through Analyzer →30-page DME Denial Code Handbook with paste-ready appeal letters.
Download the Handbook →CO-18 is a duplicate claim (same claim submitted twice). CO-97 is bundling — the payer says the service is already included in another payment category. Different root cause, different fix.
No. Modifier-59 is valid only when the service genuinely meets the "distinct procedural service" criteria per NCCI. Using it without documentation support can trigger an audit.
No. If the denial is incorrect — for example, oxygen contents denied after the rental cap has passed — the appeal success rate is very high. Always verify the rental month count before accepting the denial.