Mountain State Medical Policy Bulletin |
Section: | Surgery |
Number: | S-187 |
Topic: | Artificial Intervertebral Disc Replacement |
Effective Date: | October 29, 2007 |
Issued Date: | February 11, 2008 |
Date Last Reviewed: | 08/2007 |
Indications and Limitations of Coverage
Intervertebral disc replacement or spinal arthroplasty (22857, 22862, 22865, 0090T-0098T, 0163T, 0164T, 0165T), using an artificial disc, is considered experimental/investigational as a treatment for degenerative disc disease involving the cervical, thoracic, and/or lumbar vertebrae (722.4, 722.51-722.52, 722.6). The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has granted approval for several lumbar artificial intervertebral replacement discs (e.g., Charité, ProDisc®-L), and for several cervical replacement discs (Bryan®, Prestige®ST, ProDisc™-C). Studies regarding artificial intervertebral disc replacement are inadequate to permit scientific conclusions regarding the long-term safety, efficacy, and durability of the replacement disc. Additionally, concerns were identified regarding long-term bone/implant interface, wear debris, metal ion concentration, and adjacent segment effects. Artificial intervertebral disc replacement is not covered and is not eligible for payment. A participating, preferred, or network provider can bill the member for this service. Description Degenerative disc disease (DDD) involves deterioration of the intervertebral disc that has been confirmed by patient medical history and radiographic studies. DDD can lead to disc dehydration, annular tears, and/or loss of disc height or collapse. This can result in chronic pain due to resultant abnormal motion of the affected spinal segment, biomechanical instability of the spine, and nerve root compression. Spinal fusion is a common surgical approach to degenerative disc disease when conservative treatment (i.e., rest, pain medication, physical therapy) fails. This process involves joining two or more vertebrae together to produce a more stable spine. Bone grafting or metal hardware is used to perform a spinal fusion. Fusion eliminates abnormal motion and instability of the spine by altering the biomechanics of the back. It also restricts motion, which may cause potential premature disc degeneration at adjacent levels of the spine especially in younger patients. |
|
22857 | 22862 | 22865 | 0090T | 0092T | 0093T |
0095T | 0096T | 0098T | 0163T | 0164T | 0165T |
This policy may not apply to FEP. Medical Policy is not an authorization, certification, explanation of benefits, or a contract. Benefits are determined by the Federal Employee Program. |
National Blue Cross Blue Shield Association Medical Policy 7.01.87, Artificial Intervertebral Disc, 04/01/05 Complications of Artificial Disc Replacement-A Report of 27 Patients with the SB Charité Disc”, Journal of Spinal Disorders & Techniques, Vol. 16, No. 4, 04/2003 Neurological Complications of Lumbar Artificial Disc Replacement and Comparison of Clinical Results with Those Related to Lumbar Arthrodesis in the Literature: Results of a Multicenter, Prospective, Randomized Investigational Device Exemption Study of Charité Intervertebral Disc”, Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine, Vol. 1, 09/2004 Clinical Outcomes with the PRESTIGE II Cervical Disc: Preliminary Results from a Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial, Neurosurgery Focus, Vol. 17(3), 09/2004 Long-Term Outcome after Implantation of the PRESTIGE I Disc in an End-Stage Indication: 4 Year Results from a Pilot Study, Neurosurgery Focus, Vol. 17(3), 09/2004 Lumbar Total Disc Replacement. Seven to Eleven Year Follow-Up, Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery in America, Vol. 87(3), 03/2005 Prospective, Randomized, Multicenter Food and Drug Administration Investigational Device Exemption Study of Lumbar Total Disc Replacement with the Charité Artificial Disc Versus Lumbar Fusion: Part II: Evaluation of Radiographic Outcomes and Correlation of Surgical Technique Accuracy With Clinical Outcomes, Spine, Vol. 30(14), 07/2005 Clinical Significance of Heterotopic Ossification in Cervical Disc Replacement: A Prospective Multicenter Clinical Trial, Neurosurgery, Vol. 57(4), 10/2005 The Treatment of Disabling Single-Level Lumbar Discogenic Low Back Pain with Total Disc Arthroplasty Utilizing the ProDisc Prosthesis: A Prospective Study with 2-Year Minimum Follow-Up, Spine, Vol. 30(19), 10/2005 Cervical Arthroplasty after Previous Surgery: Results of Treating 24 Discs in 15 Patients, Spine, Vol. 3(5), 11/2005 Assessment of Adjacent-Segment Disease in Patients Treated with Cervical Fusion or Arthroplasty: A Prospective 2-Year Study, Journal of Neurosurgery of the Spine, Vol. 3(6), 12/2005 Intervertebral Prosthesis Versus Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion: One-Year Results of a Prospective Non-Randomized Study, Acta Orthop Belg, Vol. 72(1), 01/2006 Prospective Randomized Controlled Study of the Bryan Cervical Disc: Early Clinical Results from a Single Investigational Site, Journal of Neurosurgery of the Spine, Vol. 4(1), 01/2006 Charité Total Disc Replacement – Clinical and Radiographical Results After an Average Follow-Up of 17 Years, European Spine Journal, Vol. 15(2), 02/2006 Complications with Cervical Arthroplasty, Journal of Neurosurgery of the Spine, Vol. 4(2), 02/2006 Lumbar Total Disc Arthroplasty in Patients Older Than 60 Years of Age: A Prospective Study of the ProDisc Prosthesis with 2-Year Minimum Follow-Up Period, Journal of Neurosurgery of the Spine, Vol. 4(2), 02/2006 Lumbar Total Disc Arthroplasty Utilizing the ProDisc Prosthesis in Smokers Versus Nonsmokers: A Prospective Study with 2-Year Minimum Follow-Up, Spine, Vol. 31(9), 04/2006 Revisability of the Charité Artificial Disc Replacement: Analysis of 688 Patients Enrolled in the U.S. IDE Study of the Charité Artificial Disc, Spine, Vol. 31(11), 05/2006 Design Limitations of Bryan Disc Arthroplasty, Spinal Journal, Vol. 6(3), May-June 2006 Mobility of Lumbar Segments Instrumented with a ProDisc II Prosthesis: A Two-Year Follow-Up Study, Spine, Vol. 31(15), 07/2006. Clinical Results of Total Lumbar Disc Replacement with ProDisc II: Three-Year Results for Different Indications, Spine, Vol. 31(17), 08/2006 Polyethylene Wear Debris and Long-Term Clinical Failure of the Charité Disc Prosthesis: A Study of 4 Patients, Spine, Vol. 32(2), 01/2007 Segmental Malalignment with the Bryan Cervical Disc Prosthesis-Does it Occur? Journal of Spinal Disorders & Techniques, Vol. 20(1), 02/2007 Clinical and Radiographic Analysis of Cervical Disc Arthroplasty Compared with Allograft Fusion: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial, Journal of Neurosurgery of the Spine, Vol. 6(3), 03/2007 Long-Term Results of One-Level Lumbar Arthroplasty: Minimum 10-Year Follow-Up of the Charité Artificial Disc in 106 Patients, Spine, Vol. 32(6), 03/2007 A Radiostereometric Analysis of the Bryan Cervical Disc Prosthesis, Spine, Vol. 32(8), 04/2007 Charité Versus ProDisc: A Comparative Study of a Minimum 3-Year Follow-Up, Spine, Vol. 32(9), 04/2007 Hybrid Testing of Lumbar Charité Discs Versus Fusions, Spine, Vol. 32(9), 04/2007 Revision and Explanation Strategies Involving the Charité Lumbar Artificial Disc Replacement, Spine, Vol. 32(9), 04/2007 Results of the Prospective, Randomized, Multicenter Food and Drug Administration Investigational Device Exemption Study of the ProDisc-L Total Disc Replacement Versus Circumferential Fusion for the Treatment of 1-Level Degenerative Disc Disease, Spine, Vol. 32(11), 05/2007 Survival and Clinical Outcome of SB Charité III Disc Replacement for Back Pain, Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (British), Vol. 89(6), 06/2007 |
[Version 005 of S-187] |
[Version 004 of S-187] |
[Version 003 of S-187] |
[Version 002 of S-187] |
[Version 001 of S-187] |