Skip to main content

D65 vs R70-R79

D65 (Disseminated intravascular coagulation [defibrination syndrome]) compared with R70-R79 (Abnormal findings on examination of blood, without diagnosis (R70-R79)), from the official CMS tabular data.

Summary

These codes can be reported together when both conditions are documented, because R70-R79 lists D65 under Excludes2, which marks them as distinct conditions.

Official rule
What is different?

The conditions named, billing status and chapter.D65 is “Disseminated intravascular coagulation [defibrination syndrome]”; R70-R79 is “Abnormal findings on examination of blood, without diagnosis (R70-R79)”. R70-R79 is a non-billable header; D65 is billable. D65 sits in D50-D89 — Diseases of the Blood and Blood-forming Organs and Certain Disorders Involving the Immune Mechanism (D50-D89); R70-R79 in R00-R99 — Symptoms, Signs and Abnormal Clinical and Laboratory Findings, Not Elsewhere Classified (R00-R99).

Registry fact

Can these codes be reported together?

Yes, when both are documented.R70-R79 lists D65 under Excludes2: “coagulation hemorrhagic disorders (D65-D68)”. Excludes2 marks distinct conditions that may both be reported when both are documented.

Official ruleGuide: Excludes1 vs Excludes2

Is there an Excludes1 relationship?

None.Neither entry carries an Excludes1 note that names the other code. D65 carries 3 Excludes1 notes covering other codes; the side-by-side table quotes them.

Official rule

Is there an Excludes2 relationship?

Yes.R70-R79’s tabular entry: “coagulation hemorrhagic disorders (D65-D68)”. The note covers D65.

Official ruleGuide: Excludes1 vs Excludes2

Is one more specific?

Not comparable.The codes sit in different categories; specificity is only comparable within one category.

Is one a parent or header code?

One is a header.R70-R79 is a non-billable header, but D65 is not one of its subdivisions.

Registry fact

Are there sequencing instructions?

None.Neither entry carries a Code First or Use Additional Code note that names the other.

Official rule

Are there other coding relationships?

None found.No laterality, encounter-phase, Table of Neoplasms, Table of Drugs and Chemicals, or history-versus-active-disease relationship links these codes.

MedCoder-derived

Official rule: a tabular instructional note or a section of the ICD-10-CM Official Guidelines, quoted as published. Registry fact: the codes’ own published attributes (titles, billable status, position in the hierarchy, code set). MedCoder-derived: a reading MedCoder computes from those facts; it is not itself a rule. How to read the labels

Can these codes be reported together?

Informational

Excludes2 relationship

R70-R79
Abnormal findings on examination of blood, without diagnosis (R70-R79)
↔
D65
Disseminated intravascular coagulation [defibrination syndrome]

What we found

Yes, when both are documented.R70-R79 carries an Excludes2 note covering D65: “coagulation hemorrhagic disorders (D65-D68)”

Excludes2 marks distinct conditions — both may be reported when both are documented.

What to review

Report both only when the documentation supports both conditions; otherwise report the one documented.

Guide: Excludes1 vs Excludes2Check these on a claim

Why it matters

An Excludes2 note means the excluded condition is not part of the code above it, but a patient can have both. Report both when both are documented.

Source / rule

CMS ICD-10-CM tabular instructional notes

Official guidance behind these answers

  • Section I.A.12.b — Excludes2 · applies to: Excludes2

    A type 2 Excludes note represents “Not included here.” An excludes2 note indicates that the condition excluded is not part of the condition represented by the code, but a patient may have both conditions at the same time. When an Excludes2 note appears under a code, it is acceptable to use both the code and the excluded code together, when appropriate.

    ICD-10-CM Official Guidelines FY2026

Quoted from the ICD-10-CM Official Guidelines for Coding and Reporting in effect for the release shown. The tabular notes above are the code-level instruction; these sections are the convention that says how such a note is applied. Source document (CMS PDF) · Release and checksum

Side by side

D65Disseminated intravascular coagulation [defibrination syndrome]R70-R79Abnormal findings on examination of blood, without diagnosis (R70-R79)
Billing statusBillableNon-billable header
ClassificationD50-D89 — Diseases of the Blood and Blood-forming Organs and Certain Disorders Involving the Immune Mechanism (D50-D89)R00-R99 — Symptoms, Signs and Abnormal Clinical and Laboratory Findings, Not Elsewhere Classified (R00-R99)
DefinitionDisseminated intravascular coagulation [defibrination syndrome] is a billable ICD-10-CM diagnosis code (D65).Abnormal findings on examination of blood, without diagnosis (R70-R79) is a non-billable ICD-10-CM category code (R70-R79).
Includes
Afibrinogenemia, acquired
Consumption coagulopathy
COVID-19 associated diffuse or disseminated intravascular coagulopathy
Diffuse or disseminated intravascular coagulation [DIC]
—
Excludes1
disseminated intravascular coagulation (complicating):
in newborn (P60)
pregnancy, childbirth and the puerperium (O45.0, O46.0, O67.0, O72.3)
—
Excludes2
disseminated intravascular coagulation (complicating):
abortion or ectopic or molar pregnancy (O00-O07, O08.1)
abnormal findings on antenatal screening of mother (O28.-)
abnormalities of lipids (E78.-)
abnormalities of platelets and thrombocytes (D69.-)
abnormalities of white blood cells classified elsewhere (D70-D72)
coagulation hemorrhagic disorders (D65-D68)
diagnostic abnormal findings classified elsewhere - see Alphabetical Index
hemorrhagic and hematological disorders of newborn (P50-P61)
Code also
, if applicable, associated condition
—

Notes are the code’s own tabular entry, quoted as published. A note that names the other code is the one the verdict above rests on.

Edit this comparisonCheck a whole claim

Derived from the official CMS ICD-10-CM tabular data (FY2027). A coding-rule comparison, not billing advice: payer-specific edits and medical-necessity policy are outside its scope. All data sources