Dear AuntMinnie Member,
For any new medical imaging technique to achieve widespread usage, it needs three things: reimbursement, reimbursement, reimbursement. Virtual colonoscopy may be moving closer to achieving this holy trinity in the U.S. as at least one Medicare Part B carrier examines expanded payment for the procedure.
A series of advisory committee meetings that concluded this week examined whether a Medicare contractor covering the Midwest would expand its coverage for virtual colonoscopy studies, according to an article by staff writer Eric Barnes that we're featuring in our Virtual Colonoscopy Digital Community.
Proponents of virtual colonoscopy believe that expanded local and regional coverage could precede a nationwide policy that includes the virtual exam. They've scored a few local victories, and hope that winning the Midwest will put them a step closer to their goal.
But the local coverage decision being debated in America's heartland is far from a slam-dunk victory for VC. It includes significant restrictions and caveats, notably the exclusion of reimbursement for any screening exams. One radiologist even said that certain provisions made no sense compared to more logical guidelines in other regions.
Read all about it by clicking here, and when you're done, why not visit our Virtual Colonoscopy Digital Community at vc.auntminnie.com for the latest news on this cutting-edge procedure.
![Axial images from unenhanced calcium score cardiac CT (left) and curved planar reformation images from CT angiography (right) show that higher long-term exposure to air pollution is associated with greater coronary artery calcium and more obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD). Top row: Images in a 68-year-old male patient with higher 10-year mean ambient air pollution exposure (7.9 μg/m3 for particulate matter measuring ≤2.5 μm in diameter [PM2.5] and 17.4 parts per billion [ppb] for NO2) with extensive CAD (coronary artery calcium score [CACS] >1,000 and obstructive CAD [≥70% diameter stenosis]). Bottom row: Images in a 57-year-old female patient with lower 10-year mean ambient air pollution exposure (6.3 μg/m3 for PM2.5 and 4.6 ppb for NO2) with no CAD (CACS = 0 and no obstructive stenosis).](https://img.auntminnie.com/mindful/smg/workspaces/default/uploads/2026/06/hanneman.r6SMLzkezo.png?auto=format%2Ccompress&dpr=2&fit=crop&h=167&q=70&w=250)
