Singh Kern, Qureshi Sheeraz
Minimally Invasive Spine Insitute, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL.
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Mt. Sinai Hospital, New York City, NY.
Int J Spine Surg. 2014 Dec 1;8. doi: 10.14444/1013. eCollection 2014.
Morgan Lorio, MD, FACS, Chair, ISASS Task Force on Coding & Reimbursement In 2011, CPT code 22551 was revised to combine or bundle CPT codes 63075 and 22554 when both procedures were performed at the same site/same surgical session. The add on code +22552 is used to report each additional interspace. 2014 heralded a downward pressure on this now prime target code (for non-coverage?) 22551 through an egregious insurer attempt to redefine cervical arthrodesis, effectively removing spine surgeon choice and altering best practice without clinical evidence. Currently, spine surgeons are equally split on the use of allograft versus cages for cervical arthrodesis. Structural allograft, CPT code 20931, is reported once per same surgical session, regardless of the number of allografts used. CPT code 22851 which is designated solely for cage use, has a higher reimbursement than structural allograft, and may be reported for each inner space. Hence, the rationale behind why some payers wrongly consider "spine cages NOT medically necessary for cervical fusion." A timely consensus paper summarizing spine surgeon purview on the logical progressive evolution of cervical interbody fusion for ISASS/IASP membership was strategically identified as an advocacy focus by the ISASS Task Force. ISASS appreciates the authors' charge with gratitude. This article has both teeth and transparent clinical real-world merit.
摩根·洛里奥医学博士,美国外科学院院士,国际脊柱侧凸研究学会编码与报销特别工作组主席 2011年,CPT编码22551进行了修订,当两个手术在同一部位/同一手术过程中进行时,将CPT编码63075和22554合并或捆绑。附加编码+22552用于报告每个额外的间隙。2014年,由于保险公司试图重新定义颈椎融合术,对这个现在的主要目标编码(是否不涵盖?)22551施加了下行压力,这一行为在没有临床证据的情况下有效地剥夺了脊柱外科医生的选择并改变了最佳实践。目前,脊柱外科医生在颈椎融合术中使用同种异体骨与椎间融合器的问题上存在分歧。结构性同种异体骨,CPT编码20931,在同一手术过程中无论使用的同种异体骨数量多少都只报告一次。专门用于椎间融合器使用的CPT编码22851的报销费用高于结构性同种异体骨,并且每个内部间隙都可以报告。因此,一些支付方错误地认为“脊柱椎间融合器对于颈椎融合术并非医学必需”的背后原因。一份及时的共识文件,总结了脊柱外科医生对国际脊柱侧凸研究学会/国际疼痛研究学会成员颈椎椎间融合术合理渐进发展的权限,被国际脊柱侧凸研究学会特别工作组战略性地确定为倡导重点。国际脊柱侧凸研究学会感激地感谢作者承担此项任务。本文既有力度又有透明的临床现实价值。