Docality.com Logo
 
Dr. Nitish  Badhwar  Md image

Dr. Nitish Badhwar Md

350 Parnassus Ave
San Francisco CA 94143
415 532-2554
Medical School: Other - 1993
Accepts Medicare: Yes
Participates In eRX: Yes
Participates In PQRS: Yes
Participates In EHR: Yes
License #: A76074
NPI: 1619928892
Taxonomy Codes:
207R00000X 207RC0001X

Request Appointment Information

Awards & Recognitions

About Us

Practice Philosophy

Conditions

Dr. Nitish Badhwar is associated with these group practices

Procedure Pricing

HCPCS Code Description Average Price Average Price
Allowed By Medicare
HCPCS Code:33249 Description:Nsert pace-defib w/lead Average Price:$5,407.55 Average Price Allowed
By Medicare:
$945.02
HCPCS Code:93651 Description:Ablate heart dysrhythm focus Average Price:$5,041.29 Average Price Allowed
By Medicare:
$973.19
HCPCS Code:93620 Description:Electrophysiology evaluation Average Price:$3,779.00 Average Price Allowed
By Medicare:
$395.51
HCPCS Code:93613 Description:Electrophys map 3d add-on Average Price:$2,276.00 Average Price Allowed
By Medicare:
$419.47
HCPCS Code:93641 Description:Electrophysiology evaluation Average Price:$1,923.00 Average Price Allowed
By Medicare:
$213.04
HCPCS Code:99205 Description:Office/outpatient visit new Average Price:$788.67 Average Price Allowed
By Medicare:
$182.41
HCPCS Code:93621 Description:Electrophysiology evaluation Average Price:$682.00 Average Price Allowed
By Medicare:
$125.66
HCPCS Code:99223 Description:Initial hospital care Average Price:$741.90 Average Price Allowed
By Medicare:
$219.27
HCPCS Code:99204 Description:Office/outpatient visit new Average Price:$629.36 Average Price Allowed
By Medicare:
$142.23
HCPCS Code:99215 Description:Office/outpatient visit est Average Price:$551.97 Average Price Allowed
By Medicare:
$121.11
HCPCS Code:99222 Description:Initial hospital care Average Price:$506.00 Average Price Allowed
By Medicare:
$148.87
HCPCS Code:99214 Description:Office/outpatient visit est Average Price:$409.83 Average Price Allowed
By Medicare:
$86.12
HCPCS Code:99221 Description:Initial hospital care Average Price:$375.55 Average Price Allowed
By Medicare:
$109.73
HCPCS Code:93284 Description:Icd device progr eval mult Average Price:$319.61 Average Price Allowed
By Medicare:
$71.77
HCPCS Code:93283 Description:Icd device progr eval dual Average Price:$288.40 Average Price Allowed
By Medicare:
$65.35
HCPCS Code:93295 Description:Icd device interrogat remote Average Price:$270.89 Average Price Allowed
By Medicare:
$73.94
HCPCS Code:93281 Description:Pm device progr eval multi Average Price:$231.29 Average Price Allowed
By Medicare:
$51.42
HCPCS Code:93282 Description:Icd device prog eval 1 sngl Average Price:$218.04 Average Price Allowed
By Medicare:
$48.21
HCPCS Code:93280 Description:Pm device progr eval dual Average Price:$197.70 Average Price Allowed
By Medicare:
$44.36
HCPCS Code:93279 Description:Pm device progr eval sngl Average Price:$164.29 Average Price Allowed
By Medicare:
$37.21
HCPCS Code:93010 Description:Electrocardiogram report Average Price:$61.11 Average Price Allowed
By Medicare:
$9.62

HCPCS Code Definitions

93282
Programming device evaluation (in person) with iterative adjustment of the implantable device to test the function of the device and select optimal permanent programmed values with analysis, review and report by a physician or other qualified health care professional; single lead implantable cardioverter-defibrillator system
93641
Electrophysiologic evaluation of single or dual chamber pacing cardioverter-defibrillator leads including defibrillation threshold evaluation (induction of arrhythmia, evaluation of sensing and pacing for arrhythmia termination) at time of initial implantation or replacement; with testing of single or dual chamber pacing cardioverter-defibrillator pulse generator
93283
Programming device evaluation (in person) with iterative adjustment of the implantable device to test the function of the device and select optimal permanent programmed values with analysis, review and report by a physician or other qualified health care professional; dual lead implantable cardioverter-defibrillator system
93281
Programming device evaluation (in person) with iterative adjustment of the implantable device to test the function of the device and select optimal permanent programmed values with analysis, review and report by a physician or other qualified health care professional; multiple lead pacemaker system
99205
Office or other outpatient visit for the evaluation and management of a new patient, which requires these 3 key components: A comprehensive history; A comprehensive examination; Medical decision making of high complexity. Counseling and/or coordination of care with other physicians, other qualified health care professionals, or agencies are provided consistent with the nature of the problem(s) and the patient's and/or family's needs. Usually, the presenting problem(s) are of moderate to high severity. Typically, 60 minutes are spent face-to-face with the patient and/or family.
93280
Programming device evaluation (in person) with iterative adjustment of the implantable device to test the function of the device and select optimal permanent programmed values with analysis, review and report by a physician or other qualified health care professional; dual lead pacemaker system
93620
Comprehensive electrophysiologic evaluation including insertion and repositioning of multiple electrode catheters with induction or attempted induction of arrhythmia; with right atrial pacing and recording, right ventricular pacing and recording, His bundle recording
93621
Comprehensive electrophysiologic evaluation including insertion and repositioning of multiple electrode catheters with induction or attempted induction of arrhythmia; with left atrial pacing and recording from coronary sinus or left atrium (List separately in addition to code for primary procedure)
93010
Electrocardiogram, routine ECG with at least 12 leads; interpretation and report only
93279
Programming device evaluation (in person) with iterative adjustment of the implantable device to test the function of the device and select optimal permanent programmed values with analysis, review and report by a physician or other qualified health care professional; single lead pacemaker system
99204
Office or other outpatient visit for the evaluation and management of a new patient, which requires these 3 key components: A comprehensive history; A comprehensive examination; Medical decision making of moderate complexity. Counseling and/or coordination of care with other physicians, other qualified health care professionals, or agencies are provided consistent with the nature of the problem(s) and the patient's and/or family's needs. Usually, the presenting problem(s) are of moderate to high severity. Typically, 45 minutes are spent face-to-face with the patient and/or family.
33249
Insertion or replacement of permanent pacing cardioverter-defibrillator system with transvenous lead(s), single or dual chamber
99223
Initial hospital care, per day, for the evaluation and management of a patient, which requires these 3 key components: A comprehensive history; A comprehensive examination; and Medical decision making of high complexity. Counseling and/or coordination of care with other physicians, other qualified health care professionals, or agencies are provided consistent with the nature of the problem(s) and the patient's and/or family's needs. Usually, the problem(s) requiring admission are of high severity. Typically, 70 minutes are spent at the bedside and on the patient's hospital floor or unit.
99222
Initial hospital care, per day, for the evaluation and management of a patient, which requires these 3 key components: A comprehensive history; A comprehensive examination; and Medical decision making of moderate complexity. Counseling and/or coordination of care with other physicians, other qualified health care professionals, or agencies are provided consistent with the nature of the problem(s) and the patient's and/or family's needs. Usually, the problem(s) requiring admission are of moderate severity. Typically, 50 minutes are spent at the bedside and on the patient's hospital floor or unit.
93284
Programming device evaluation (in person) with iterative adjustment of the implantable device to test the function of the device and select optimal permanent programmed values with analysis, review and report by a physician or other qualified health care professional; multiple lead implantable cardioverter-defibrillator system
99214
Office or other outpatient visit for the evaluation and management of an established patient, which requires at least 2 of these 3 key components: A detailed history; A detailed examination; Medical decision making of moderate complexity. Counseling and/or coordination of care with other physicians, other qualified health care professionals, or agencies are provided consistent with the nature of the problem(s) and the patient's and/or family's needs. Usually, the presenting problem(s) are of moderate to high severity. Typically, 25 minutes are spent face-to-face with the patient and/or family.
93613
Intracardiac electrophysiologic 3-dimensional mapping (List separately in addition to code for primary procedure)
99221
Initial hospital care, per day, for the evaluation and management of a patient, which requires these 3 key components: A detailed or comprehensive history; A detailed or comprehensive examination; and Medical decision making that is straightforward or of low complexity. Counseling and/or coordination of care with other physicians, other qualified health care professionals, or agencies are provided consistent with the nature of the problem(s) and the patient's and/or family's needs. Usually, the problem(s) requiring admission are of low severity. Typically, 30 minutes are spent at the bedside and on the patient's hospital floor or unit.
99215
Office or other outpatient visit for the evaluation and management of an established patient, which requires at least 2 of these 3 key components: A comprehensive history; A comprehensive examination; Medical decision making of high complexity. Counseling and/or coordination of care with other physicians, other qualified health care professionals, or agencies are provided consistent with the nature of the problem(s) and the patient's and/or family's needs. Usually, the presenting problem(s) are of moderate to high severity. Typically, 40 minutes are spent face-to-face with the patient and/or family.
93295
Interrogation device evaluation(s) (remote), up to 90 days; single, dual, or multiple lead implantable cardioverter-defibrillator system with interim analysis, review(s) and report(s) by a physician or other qualified health care professional

Medical Malpractice Cases

None Found

Medical Board Sanctions

None Found

Referrals

NPI
Doctor Name
Specialty
Count
1972531788
Cardiovascular Disease (Cardiology)
1,139
1700835584
Cardiovascular Disease (Cardiology)
857
1477533461
Cardiovascular Disease (Cardiology)
835
1588631568
Cardiovascular Disease (Cardiology)
796
1497774798
Cardiovascular Disease (Cardiology)
608
1225099286
Nephrology
537
1891720579
Cardiovascular Disease (Cardiology)
528
1891748034
Diagnostic Radiology
518
1609801109
Cardiovascular Disease (Cardiology)
490
1558577106
Cardiovascular Disease (Cardiology)
473
*These referrals represent the top 10 that Dr. Badhwar has made to other doctors

Publications

Impact of Periprocedural Colchicine on Postprocedural Management in Patients Undergoing a Left Atrial Appendage Ligation Using LARIAT. - Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology
Left atrial appendage (LAA) can be effectively and safely excluded using a novel percutaneous LARIAT ligation system. However, due to pericardial catheter manipulation and LAA ligation and subsequent necrosis, postprocedural course is complicated by pericarditis. We intended to evaluate the preprocedural use of colchicine on the incidence of postprocedural pericardial complications.In this multicenter observational study, we included all consecutive patients who underwent LARIAT procedure at the participating centers. Many patients received periprocedural colchicine at the discretion of the physician. We compared the postprocedural outcomes of patients who received prophylactic periprocedural colchicine (colchicine group) with those who did not receive colchicine (standard group). A total of 344 consecutive patients, 243 in the "colchicine group" and 101 in the "standard group," were included. The mean age, median CHADS2VASc score, and HASBLED scores were 70 ± 11 years, 3 ± 1.7, and 3 ± 1.1, respectively. There were no significant differences in major baseline characteristics between the two groups. Severe pericarditis was significantly lower in the "colchicine group" compared to the "standard group" (10 [4%] vs. 16 [16%] P<0.0001). The colchicine group, compared to the standard group, had lesser pericardial drain output (186 ± 84 mL vs. 351 ± 83, P<0.001), shorter pericardial drain duration (16 ± 4 vs. 23 ± 19 hours, P<0.04), and similar incidence of delayed pericardial effusion (4 [1.6%] to 3 [3%], P = 0.42) when compared to the standard group.Use of colchicine periprocedurally was associated with significant reduction in postprocedural pericarditis and associated complications.© 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Importance of Ventricular Tachycardia Induction and Mapping for Patients Referred for Epicardial Ablation. - Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE
Many nonischemic cardiomyopathy (NICMP) patients referred for catheter ablation of ventricular tachycardia (VT) undergo an initial epicardial approach under general anesthesia (GA). However, GA may suppress inducibility and decrease tolerance of induced VT, leaving substrate modification as the sole ablation method.Determine the utility of a strategy of initial programmed electrical stimulation (PES) under light sedation in patients referred for epicardial ablation of VT.Of 68 NICMP patients referred for VT ablation, 25 were referred specifically for epicardial ablation. All patients underwent PES under conscious sedation, with conversion to GA and epicardial access only if VT morphology and/or endocardial mapping suggested an epicardial substrate.VT was induced with PES in 24 of 25 patients (mean age 52 years; 76% male; ejection fraction 38 ± 18%). VT was hemodynamically tolerated in 63% and unstable in 38% of patients. The noninducible/unstable VT patients underwent substrate modification based on voltage and pace mapping. Of the patients with stable VT, 73% were mapped and ablated endocardially (six right ventricle, three left ventricle, one left coronary cusp, one middle cardiac vein), and 33% were successfully ablated in areas of normal endocardial voltage. After ablation, the clinical VT was noninducible in all patients. After mean follow-up of 10 months, 80% were free of implantable cardioverter defibrillator shocks or sustained VT.An initial approach of PES and entrainment mapping under conscious sedation is critically important for patients with NICMP referred for epicardial ablation. Empiric ablation of endocardial/epicardial scar would have missed the clinical VT in 20% of patients.© 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
The Effect of Direct Current Stimulation versus T-Wave Shock on Defibrillation Threshold Testing. - Pacing and clinical electrophysiology : PACE
There are several methods to induce ventricular fibrillation (VF) during defibrillation threshold (DFT) testing. Delivering a shock at a critical time during the T wave (T-shock) is the conventional approach, while delivering a constant direct current voltage (DC stim) from the implantable cardioverter defibrillator is an alternative method. Only a few reports compare VF induction methods. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects and safety of DC stim versus T-shock.We retrospectively investigated 414 consecutive patients undergoing DFT testing. We compared the two groups (DC stim and T-shock) with respect to clinical characteristics, electrocardiogram (ECG) changes, and complications.Ventricular arrhythmia, including ventricular tachycardia (VT) and VF, was induced by DC stim in 93 patients or T-shock in 321 patients. No more than three attempts were performed during one procedure. There was no significant difference in the baseline ECG, induced tachycardia cycle length (TCL), or complications between the two groups. However, the induced TCL was significantly shorter than the clinical TCL regardless of induction method (P = 0.001). Five patients suffered major complications (i.e., electromechanical dissociation or incessant VT). A history of atrial fibrillation was significantly greater in patients with major complications than the others (80% vs 24%, P = 0.004), and was an independent predictor on multivariate analysis.There is no significant difference in induced TCL or complications between the DC stim and T-shock. The induced TCL is significantly shorter than clinical TCL regardless of induction method.© 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Differences in complication rates between large bore needle and a long micropuncture needle during epicardial access: time to change clinical practice? - Circulation. Arrhythmia and electrophysiology
A dry epicardial access (EA) is increasingly used for advanced cardiovascular procedures. Conventionally used large bore needles (Tuohy or Pajunk needle; LBN) have been associated with low but definite incidence of major complications with EA. Use of micropuncture needle (MPN) may decrease the risk of complications. We intended to compare the outcomes of LBN with MPN for EA.We report a multicenter observational study of consecutive patients who underwent EA for ventricular tachycardia ablation or Lariat procedure using the LBN or MPN. Oral anticoagulation was stopped before the procedure. Baseline characteristics and procedure-related complications were collected and compared. Of the 404 patients, LBN and MPN were used in 46% and 54% of patients, respectively. There was no significant difference in the incidence of inadvertent puncture of myocardium between LBN and MPN (7.6% versus 6.8%, P=0.76). However, there was a significantly higher rate of large pericardial effusions with LBN compared with MPN (8.1% versus 0.9%; P<0.001). The incidence of pleural effusions were not significantly different between both (1.6% versus 2.3%; P=0.64). LBN group had an increase in other complications compared with MPN (open heart surgery to repair cardiac laceration [6 versus 0], injury to liver [1 versus 0], coronaries [1 versus 0], and superior epigastric artery requiring surgical exploration [0 versus 1]).The use of MPN is associated with decreased incidence of major complications, and the need for surgical repair and routine use should be considered for EA.© 2015 American Heart Association, Inc.
Left atrial appendage occlusion for stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation. - Expert review of cardiovascular therapy
The most severe consequence of atrial fibrillation (AF) is a cardioembolic stroke. The incidence of cardioembolic stroke increases significantly in patients with AF. Although warfarin has been the mainstay of the prevention of cardioembolic stroke, there are several limitations to the use of warfarin that hinder its effectiveness. This article provides the historical development of devices that exclude the left atrial appendage, their effectiveness and potential patient selection, as an alternative to warfarin and the novel oral anticoagulation therapy for the prevention of cardioembolic stroke in patients with AF.
Surgical and concomitant epicardial-endocardial (hybrid) ablation of persistent and long-standing persistent atrial fibrillation. - Current problems in cardiology
Catheter ablation of atrial fibrillation (AF) has been shown to be effective for paroxysmal AF. However, for patients with persistent or longstanding persistent AF, the success rates for catheter ablation is low. The Cox-Maze procedure is the most effective non-pharmacological treatment of AF. However, due to the need for open-heart surgery and the morbidity associated with the surgical Cox-Maze procedure, minimally invasive and epicardial-endocardial (hybrid) ablation procedures have been developed. This article will review the main surgical and hybrid approaches used for the treatment of persistent and long-standing persistent AF.Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Left atrial appendage ligation in patients with atrial fibrillation leads to a decrease in atrial dispersion. - Journal of the American Heart Association
Left atrial appendage (LAA) exclusion has been performed in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) to prevent thrombus formation and subsequent cardioembolic events. Left atrial electrical remodeling is a recognized factor in the recurrence of AF. The effects of LAA exclusion on P-wave characteristics and left atrial electrical remodeling have not been well described. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of LAA ligation on P-wave morphology in patients with AF.Fifteen patients who were in sinus rhythm during the LAA ligation procedure were included in the study. We evaluated the P-wave characteristics, including P-wave duration, P-wave amplitude, PQ interval, and P-wave dispersion, before and after ligation. Eleven patients had paroxysmal AF and 4 patients had persistent AF (12 male patients and 3 female patients). P-wave duration immediately after ligation was significantly shorter compared with baseline in all limb leads except lead aVR (P<0.05). P-wave amplitude immediately after ligation was significantly greater compared with baseline in inferior leads; however, P-wave amplitude after 1 to 3 months was significantly lower compared with immediately after ligation. PQ interval immediately after ligation was significantly shorter compared with baseline (P=0.01), and P-wave dispersion after 1 to 3 months was significantly shorter compared with baseline (P=0.02).LAA exclusion produces consistent P-wave changes consistent with decreased atrial mass and decreased atrial dispersion that may represent reverse electrical atrial remodeling. This is a potential mechanism to explain the role of LAA ligation in maintaining sinus rhythm in patients with AF.© 2015 The Authors. Published on behalf of the American Heart Association, Inc., by Wiley Blackwell.
Endocardial (Watchman) vs epicardial (Lariat) left atrial appendage exclusion devices: Understanding the differences in the location and type of leaks and their clinical implications. - Heart rhythm : the official journal of the Heart Rhythm Society
Watchman and Lariat left atrial appendage (LAA) occlusion devices are associated with LAA leaks postdeployment.The purpose of this study was to compare the incidence, characteristics, and clinical significance of these leaks.We performed a multicenter prospective observational study of all patients who underwent LAA closure. Baseline, procedural, and imaging variables along with LAA occlusion rates at 30-90 days and 1-year postprocedure were compared.A total of 478 patients (219 with the Watchman device and 259 with the Lariat device) with successful implants were included. Patients in the Lariat group had a higher CHADS2 (congestive heart failure, hypertension, age >74 years, diabetes, stroke) score and a larger left atrium and LAA. A total of 79 patients (17%) had a detectable leak at 1 year. More patients in the Watchman group had a leak compared with those in the Lariat group (46 [21%] vs 33 [14%]; P = .019). All the leaks were eccentric (edge effect) in the Watchman group and concentric (gunny sack effect) in the Lariat group. The size of the leak was larger in the Watchman group than in the Lariat group (3.10 ± 1.5 mm vs 2.15 ± 1.3 mm; P = .001). The Watchman group had 1 device embolization requiring surgery and 2 pericardial effusions requiring pericardiocentesis. In the Lariat group, 4 patients had cardiac tamponade requiring urgent surgical repair. Three patients in each group had a cerebrovascular accident and were not associated with device leaks.The Lariat device is associated with a lower rate of leaks at 1 year as compared with the Watchman device, with no difference in rates of cerebrovascular accident. There was no correlation between the presence of residual leak and the occurrence of cerebrovascular accident.Copyright © 2015 Heart Rhythm Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Sequential Percutaneous LAA Ligation and Pulmonary Vein Isolation in Patients with Persistent AF: Initial Results of a Feasibility Study. - Journal of cardiovascular electrophysiology
Left atrial appendage (LAA) ligation results in LAA electrical isolation and a decrease in atrial fibrillation (AF) burden. This study assessed the feasibility of combined percutaneous LAA ligation and pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) in patients with persistent AF.A total of 22 patients with persistent AF underwent LAA ligation with the LARIAT device followed by PVI. PVI was confirmed with the demonstration of both entrance and exit block. Patients (n = 10) in sinus rhythm pre- and post-LAA ligation underwent P-wave analysis. Monitoring for AF was performed at 1, 3, and 6 months postablation. LAA ligation was successful in 21 of 22 (95%) patients. The procedure was aborted in one patient due to pericardial adhesions. PVI was performed in 20 of 21 patients. One patient converted to atrial flutter with a controlled ventricular response after LAA ligation and refused subsequent PVI. Demonstration of entrance and exit block was achieved in 19 of 20 patients. At 3 months, 13 of 19 (68.4%) patients were in sinus rhythm. Four patients underwent a second PVI. At 6 months, 15 of 20 (75%) patients were in sinus rhythm. There was a significant decrease in P-wave duration and P-wave dispersion after LAA ligation. Complications with LAA ligation included pericarditis, a delayed pleural effusion, and a late pericardial effusion.Staged LAA ligation and PVI is feasible and decreases P-wave dispersion. Randomized studies are needed to assess the efficacy of LAA ligation as adjunctive therapy to PVI for maintaining sinus rhythm in patients with persistent AF.© 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Comparison of radionuclide angiographic synchrony analysis to echocardiography and magnetic resonance imaging for the diagnosis of arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy. - Heart rhythm : the official journal of the Heart Rhythm Society
Arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC) is a heritable arrhythmia syndrome entailing a high risk of sudden cardiac death. Discernment from benign arrhythmia disorders, particularly right ventricular outflow tract ventricular tachycardia (RVOT VT), may be challenging, providing an impetus to explore alternative modalities that may facilitate evaluation of patients with suspected ARVC.We evaluated the role of equilibrium radionuclide angiography (ERNA) as a diagnostic tool for ARVC.ERNA measures of ventricular synchrony-synchrony (S) and entropy (E)-were examined in patients with ARVC (n = 16), those with RVOT VT (n = 13), and healthy controls (n = 49). The sensitivity and specificity of ERNA parameters for ARVC diagnosis were compared with those of echocardiography (ECHO) and cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR).ERNA right ventricular synchrony parameters in patients with ARVC (S = 0.91 ± 0.07; E = 0.61 ± 0.1) differed significantly from those in patients with RVOT VT (S = 0.99 ± 0.01 [P = .0015]; E = 0.46 ± 0.05 [P < .001]) and healthy controls (S = 0.97 ± 0.02 [P = .003]; E = 0.48 ± 0.07 [P = .001]). The sensitivity of ERNA synchrony parameters for ARVC diagnosis (81%) was higher than that for ECHO (38%; P = .033) and similar to that for CMR (69%; P = .162), while specificity was lower for ERNA (89%) than that for ECHO and CMR (both 100%; P = .008).ERNA right ventricular synchrony parameters can distinguish patients with ARVC from controls with structurally normal hearts, and its performance is comparable to that of ECHO and CMR for ARVC diagnosis. These findings suggest that ERNA may serve as a valuable imaging tool in the diagnostic evaluation of patients with suspected ARVC.Copyright © 2015 Heart Rhythm Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Map & Directions

350 Parnassus Ave San Francisco, CA 94143
View Directions In Google Maps

Nearby Doctors

505 Parnassus Ave
San Francisco, CA 94143
415 761-1528
505 Parnassus Ave # 0110 University Of California San Francisco, M691
San Francisco, CA 94143
415 766-6245
400 Parnassus Ave
San Francisco, CA 94143
415 532-2289
400 Parnassus Ave
San Francisco, CA 94143
415 532-2161
1545 Divisadero St
San Francisco, CA 94143
415 537-7900
1600 Divisadero Street
San Francisco, CA 94143
415 537-7241
513 Parnassus Ave S-321
San Francisco, CA 94143
415 761-1239
505 Parnassus Ave # M696 Box 0110
San Francisco, CA 94143
415 531-1000
505 Parnassus Ave Ucsf Pediatrics M696 Box 0110
San Francisco, CA 94143
415 765-5001
2356 Sutter St
San Francisco, CA 94143
415 857-7788