DOCSLIB.ORG

Commercial MSK Procedure Code List Effective 09.01.21.Xlsx

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Effective 09/01/21 BCBST Commercial Musculoskeletal/Pain Management Procedure Codes Investigational or Non-Covered Spine Surgery Pain Management Joint Surgery CPT Description Commercial Notes 20930 Allograft for spine surgery only morselized Computer-assisted surgical navigational procedure for musculoskeletal Investigational Per BCBST Medical 20985 procedures, image-less (List separately in addition to code for primary procedure) Policy Osteotomy of spine, posterior or posterolateral approach, 3 columns, 1 vertebral 22206 segment (eg, pedicle/vertebral body subtraction); thoracic Osteotomy of spine, posterior approach, 3 columns, 1 vertebral segment (eg. 22207 Pedicle/vertebral body subtraction);lumbar Osteotomy of spine, posterior or posterolateral approach, 3 columns, 1 vertebral 22208 segment (eg, pedicle/vertebral body subtraction); each additional vertebral segment (list separately in addition to code for primary procedure) Osteotomy of spine, posterior or posterolateral approach, one vertebral segment; 22210 cervical Osteotomy of spine, posterior or posterolateral approach, 1 vertebral segment; 22212 thoracic Osteotomy of spine, posterior or posterolateral approach, 1 vertebral segment; 22214 lumbar Osteotomy of spine, posterior or posterolateral approach, 1 vertebral segment; 22216 each additional vertebral segment (List separately in addition to primary procedure) Osteotomy of spine, including discectomy anterior approach, single vertebral 22220 segment; cervical Osteotomy of spine, including discectomy, anterior approach, single vertebral 22222 segment; thoracic Osteotomy of spine, including discectomy, anterior approach, single vertebral 22224 segment; lumbar Osteotomy of spine, including discectomy, anterior approach, single vertebral 22226 segment; each additional vertebral segment (List separately in addition to code for primary procedure Percutaneous vertebroplasty (bone biopsy included when performed), 1 vertebral 22510 body, unilateral or bilateral injection, inclusive of all imaging guidance; cervicothoracic Percutaneous vertebroplasty (bone biopsy included when performed), 1 vertebral 22511 body, unilateral or bilateral injection, inclusive of all imaging guidance; lumbosacral Percutaneous vertebroplasty (bone biopsy included when performed), 1 vertebral body, unilateral or bilateral injection, inclusive of all imaging guidance; each 22512 additional cervicothoracic or lumbosacral vertebral body (List separately in addition to code for primary procedure) Percutaneous vertebral augmentation, including cavity creation (fracture reduction and bone biopsy included when performed) using mechanical device (e.g., 22513 kyphoplasty), 1 vertebral body, unilateral or bilateral cannulation, inclusive of all imaging guidance; thoracic Effective 09/01/21 Percutaneous vertebral augmentation, including cavity creation (fracture reduction and bone biopsy included when performed) using mechanical device (e.g., 22514 kyphoplasty), 1 vertebral body, unilateral or bilateral cannulation, inclusive of all imaging guidance; lumbar Percutaneous vertebral augmentation, including cavity creation (fracture reduction and bone biopsy included when performed) using mechanical device (e.g., 22515 kyphoplasty), 1 vertebral body, unilateral or bilateral cannulation, inclusive of all imaging guidance; each additional thoracic or lumbar vertebral body (List separately in addition to code for primary procedure) Arthrodesis, lateral extracavitary technique, including minimal discectomy to 22532 prepare interspace (other than for decompression); thoracic Arthrodesis, lateral extracavitary technique, including minimal discectomy to 22533 prepare interspace (other than for decompression); lumbar Arthrodesis, lateral extracavitary technique, including minimal discectomy to prepare interspace (other than for decompression); thoracic or lumbar, each 22534 additional vertebral segment (List separately in addition to code for primary procedure) Arthrodesis, anterior transoral or extraoral technique, clivus-C1-C2 (atlas-axis), 22548 with or without excision of odontoid process Arthrodesis, anterior interbody, including disc space preparation, discectomy, 22551 osteophytectomy and decompression of spinal cord and/or nerve roots; cervical below C2 Arthrodesis, anterior interbody, including disc space preparation, discectomy, osteophytectomy and decompression of spinal cord and/or nerve roots; cervical 22552 below C2, each additional interspace (List separately in addition to code for separate procedure) Arthrodesis, anterior interbody technique, including minimal discectomy to prepare 22554 interspace (other than for decompression); cervical below C2 Arthrodesis, anterior interbody technique, including minimal discectomy to prepare 22556 interspace (other than for decompression); thoracic Arthrodesis, anterior interbody technique, including minimal discectomy to prepare 22558 interspace (other than for decompression); lumbar Arthrodesis, anterior interbody technique, including minimal discectomy to prepare 22585 interspace (other than for decompression); each additional interspace (List separately in addition to code for primary procedure) Arthrodesis, pre-sacral interbody technique, including disc space preparation, 22586 discectomy, with posterior instrumentation, with image guidance, includes bone graft when performed, L5-S1 interspace 22590 Arthrodesis, posterior technique, craniocervical (occiput-C2) 22595 Arthrodesis, posterior technique, atlas-axis (C1-C2) Arthrodesis, posterior or posterolateral technique, single level; cervical below C2 22600 segment Arthrodesis, posterior or posterolateral technique, single level; thoracic (with or 22610 without lateral transverse technique) Arthrodesis, posterior or posterolateral technique, single level; lumbar (with or 22612 without lateral transverse technique) Arthrodesis, posterior or posterolateral technique, single level; each additional 22614 vertebral segment (List separately in addition to code for primary procedure) Effective 09/01/21 Arthrodesis, posterior interbody technique, including laminectomy and/or 22630 discectomy to prepare interspace (other than for decompression), single interspace; lumbar Arthrodesis, posterior interbody technique, including laminectomy and/or discectomy to prepare interspace (other than for decompression), single 22632 interspace; each additional interspace (List separately in addition to code for primary procedure) Arthrodesis, combined posterior or posterolateral technique with posterior interbody 22633 technique including laminectomy and/or discectomy sufficient to prepare interspace Arthrodesis, combined posterior or posterolateral technique with posterior interbody technique including laminectomy and/or discectomy sufficient to prepare interspace 22634 (other than for decompression), single interspace and segment; each additional interspace and segment (List separately in addition to code for primary procedure) Arthrodesis, posterior, for spinal deformity, with or without cast; up to 6 vertebral 22800 segments Arthrodesis, posterior, for spinal deformity, with or without cast; 7 to 12 vertebral 22802 segments Arthrodesis, posterior, for spinal deformity, with or without cast; 13 or more 22804 vertebral segments Arthrodesis, anterior, for spinal deformity, with or without cast; 2 to 3 vertebral 22808 segments Arthrodesis, anterior, for spinal deformity, with or without cast; 4 to 7 vertebral 22810 segments Arthrodesis, anterior, for spinal deformity, with or without cast; 8 or more vertebral 22812 segments 22830 Exploration of spinal fusion Posterior non-segmental instrumentation (eg, Harrington rod technique, pedicle fixation across 1 interspace, atlantoaxial transarticular screw fixation, sublaminar 22840 wiring at C1, facet screw fixation) (List separately in addition to code for primary procedure) Internal spinal fixation by wiring of spinous processes (List separately in addition to 22841 code for primary procedure) Posterior segmental instrumentation (eg, pedicle fixation, dual rods with multiple 22842 hooks and sublaminar wires); 3 to 6 vertebral segments (List separately in addition to code for primary procedure) Posterior segmental instrumentation (eg, pedicle fixation, dual rods with multiple 22843 hooks and sublaminar wires); 7 to 12 vertebral segments (List separately in addition to code for primary procedure) Posterior segmental instrumentation (eg, pedicle fixation, dual rods with multiple 22844 hooks and sublaminar wires); 13 or more vertebral segments (List separately in addition to code for primary procedure) Anterior instrumentation; 2 to 3 vertebral segments (List separately in addition to 22845 code for primary procedure) Anterior instrumentation; 4 to 7 vertebral segments (List separately in addition to 22846 code for primary procedure) Anterior instrumentation; 8 or more vertebral segments (List separately in addition 22847 to code for primary procedure) 22849 Reinsertion of spinal fixaton device 22850 Removal posterior nonsegmental instrumentation 22852 Removal posterior segmental instrumentation Effective 09/01/21 Insertion of interbody biomechanical device(s) (eg, synthetic cage, mesh) with integral anterior instrumentation for device anchoring (eg, screws, flanges), when 22853 performed, to intervertebral disc space in conjunction with interbody arthrodesis, each interspace (List separately in addition to code for primary procedure) Insertion of intervertebral biomechanical device(s) (eg, synthetic cage, mesh) with integral anterior
Recommended publications
  • Modified Plate-Only Open-Door Laminoplasty Versus Laminectomy and Fusion for the Treatment of Cervical Stenotic Myelopathy

    Modified Plate-Only Open-Door Laminoplasty Versus Laminectomy and Fusion for the Treatment of Cervical Stenotic Myelopathy

    n Feature Article Modified Plate-only Open-door Laminoplasty Versus Laminectomy and Fusion for the Treatment of Cervical Stenotic Myelopathy LILI YANG, MD; YIFEI GU, MD; JUEQIAN SHI, MD; RUI GAO, MD; YANG LIU, MD; JUN LI, MD; WEN YUAN, MD, PHD abstract Full article available online at Healio.com/Orthopedics. Search: 20121217-23 The purpose of this study was to compare modified plate-only laminoplasty and lami- nectomy and fusion to confirm which of the 2 surgical modalities could achieve a better decompression outcome and whether a significant difference was found in postopera- tive complications. Clinical data were retrospectively reviewed for 141 patients with cervical stenotic myelopathy who underwent plate-only laminoplasty and laminectomy and fusion between November 2007 and June 2010. The extent of decompression was assessed by measuring the cross-sectional area of the dural sac and the distance of spinal cord drift at the 3 most narrowed levels on T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Clinical outcomes and complications were also recorded and compared. Significant en- largement of the dural sac area and spinal cord drift was achieved and well maintained in both groups, but the extent of decompression was greater in patients who underwent Figure: T2-weighted magnetic resonance image laminectomy and fusion; however, a greater decompression did not seem to produce a showing the extent of decompression assessed by better clinical outcome. No significant difference was observed in Japanese Orthopaedic measuring the cross-sectional area of the dural sac Association and Nurick scores between the 2 groups. Patients who underwent plate-only (arrow). laminoplasty showed a better improvement in Neck Dysfunction Index and visual ana- log scale scores.
  • Unicompartmental Knee Replacement

    Unicompartmental Knee Replacement

    This is a repository copy of Unicompartmental Knee Replacement. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/120113/ Version: Accepted Version Article: Takahashi, T, Pandit, HG orcid.org/0000-0001-7392-8561 and Phil, D (2017) Unicompartmental Knee Replacement. Journal of Arthroscopy and Joint Surgery, 4 (2). pp. 55-60. ISSN 0021-8790 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jajs.2017.08.009 © 2017 International Society for Knowledge for Surgeons on Arthroscopy and Arthroplasty. Published by Elsevier, a division of RELX India, Pvt. Ltd. This manuscript version is made available under the CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 license http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Reuse This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs (CC BY-NC-ND) licence. This licence only allows you to download this work and share it with others as long as you credit the authors, but you can’t change the article in any way or use it commercially. More information and the full terms of the licence here: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/ Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ Accepted Manuscript Title: Unicompartmental Knee Replacement Author: Tsuneari Takahashi PII: S2214-9635(17)30041-X DOI: http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.1016/j.jajs.2017.08.009 Reference: JAJS 97 To appear in: Authors: Hemant G.
  • Netter's Musculoskeletal Flash Cards, 1E

    Netter's Musculoskeletal Flash Cards, 1E

    Netter’s Musculoskeletal Flash Cards Jennifer Hart, PA-C, ATC Mark D. Miller, MD University of Virginia This page intentionally left blank Preface In a world dominated by electronics and gadgetry, learning from fl ash cards remains a reassuringly “tried and true” method of building knowledge. They taught us subtraction and multiplication tables when we were young, and here we use them to navigate the basics of musculoskeletal medicine. Netter illustrations are supplemented with clinical, radiographic, and arthroscopic images to review the most common musculoskeletal diseases. These cards provide the user with a steadfast tool for the very best kind of learning—that which is self directed. “Learning is not attained by chance, it must be sought for with ardor and attended to with diligence.” —Abigail Adams (1744–1818) “It’s that moment of dawning comprehension I live for!” —Calvin (Calvin and Hobbes) Jennifer Hart, PA-C, ATC Mark D. Miller, MD Netter’s Musculoskeletal Flash Cards 1600 John F. Kennedy Blvd. Ste 1800 Philadelphia, PA 19103-2899 NETTER’S MUSCULOSKELETAL FLASH CARDS ISBN: 978-1-4160-4630-1 Copyright © 2008 by Saunders, an imprint of Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be produced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Permissions for Netter Art figures may be sought directly from Elsevier’s Health Science Licensing Department in Philadelphia PA, USA: phone 1-800-523-1649, ext. 3276 or (215) 239-3276; or e-mail [email protected].
  • Arthroscopy - Orthoinfo - AAOS 6/10/12 3:40 PM

    Arthroscopy - Orthoinfo - AAOS 6/10/12 3:40 PM

    Arthroscopy - OrthoInfo - AAOS 6/10/12 3:40 PM Copyright 2010 American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Arthroscopy Arthroscopy is a surgical procedure orthopaedic surgeons use to visualize, diagnose, and treat problems inside a joint. The word arthroscopy comes from two Greek words, "arthro" (joint) and "skopein" (to look). The term literally means "to look within the joint." In an arthroscopic examination, an orthopaedic surgeon makes a small incision in the patient's skin and then inserts pencil-sized instruments that contain a small lens and lighting system to magnify and illuminate the structures inside the joint. Light is transmitted through fiber optics to the end of the arthroscope that is inserted into the joint. By attaching the arthroscope to a miniature television camera, the surgeon is able to see the interior of the joint through this very small incision rather than a large incision needed for surgery. The television camera attached to the arthroscope displays the image of the joint on a television screen, allowing the surgeon to look, for example, throughout the knee. This lets the surgeon see the cartilage, ligaments, and under the kneecap. The surgeon can determine the amount or type of injury and then repair Here are parts of the shoulder joint as or correct the problem, if it is necessary. seen trhough an arthroscope: the rotator cuff (RC), the head fo the humerus Why is arthroscopy necessary? (HH), and the biceps tendon (B). Diagnosing joint injuries and disease begins with a thorough medical history, physical examination, and usually X-rays. Additional tests such as magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or computed tomography (CT) also scan may be needed.
  • Analysis of the Cervical Spine Alignment Following Laminoplasty and Laminectomy

    Analysis of the Cervical Spine Alignment Following Laminoplasty and Laminectomy

    Spinal Cord (1999) 37, 20± 24 ã 1999 International Medical Society of Paraplegia All rights reserved 1362 ± 4393/99 $12.00 http://www.stockton-press.co.uk/sc Analysis of the cervical spine alignment following laminoplasty and laminectomy Shunji Matsunaga1, Takashi Sakou1 and Kenji Nakanisi2 1Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Kagoshima University; 2Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Kagoshima University, Sakuragaoka, Kagoshima, Japan Very little detailed biomechanical examination of the alignment of the cervical spine following laminoplasty has been reported. We performed a comparative study regarding the buckling- type alignment that follows laminoplasty and laminectomy to know the mechanical changes in the alignment of the cervical spine. Lateral images of plain roentgenograms of the cervical spine were put into a computer and examined using a program we developed for analysis of the buckling-type alignment. Sixty-four patients who underwent laminoplasty and 37 patients who underwent laminectomy were reviewed retrospectively. The subjects comprised patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) and those with ossi®cation of the posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL). The postoperative observation period was 6 years and 7 months on average after laminectomy, and 5 years and 6 months on average following laminoplasty. Development of the buckling-type alignment was found in 33% of patients following laminectomy and only 6% after laminoplasty. Development of buckling-type alignment following laminoplasty appeared markedly less than following laminectomy in both CSM and OPLL patients. These results favor laminoplasty over laminectomy from the aspect of mechanics. Keywords: laminoplasty; laminectomy; buckling; kyphosis; swan-neck deformity Introduction In 1930, Eiselberg1 reported a case of postoperative of postoperative abnormal alignment from the aspect kyphosis of the spine following laminectomy from the of the presence or absence of buckling-type alignment.
  • Download Program

    Download Program

    38th Annual San Diego Course June 4 – 5, 2021 Interactive Virtual Shoulder Course Arthroscopy Arthroplasty Fractures Program Chairmen: James C. Esch, M.D., SDSI President and C.E.O. Patrick J. Denard, M.D., Program Chair Final Program Tornier. A trusted name. A relentless focus. Innovation Now driven by Stryker. We’re doubling down on shoulder arthroplasty and to a T. renewing our promise to you and the patients you serve. Stryker. The leader, committed to making healthcare better. Tornier. The shoulder solutions, driving industry-leading innovation. You. The surgeon, delivering better outcomes for your patients. Coming together is what sets us apart. The innovation continues Summer 2021. TM and ® denote Trademarks and Registered Trademarks of Stryker Corporation or its affiliates. ©2021 Stryker Corporation or its affiliates. AP-015176A 06-MAY-2021 Instability excellence Redefining peak performance Elevate your expertise for shoulder instability repairs. With solutions ranging from simple to complex, Smith+Nephew’s Instability Excellence portfolio is setting new standards to take you to the next level while returning your patients to peak performance. Learn more at smith-nephew.com. Smith & Nephew, Inc., 150 Minuteman Road, Andover, MA 01810, www.smith-nephew.com, T +978 749 1000, US Customer Service: +1 800 343 5717 ◊Trademark of Smith+Nephew. All trademarks acknowledged. ©2021 Smith+Nephew. All rights reserved. Printed in USA. 30280 V1 04/21 Advanced healing solutions Redefining healing potential for rotator cuff repair REGENESORB◊ Material Replaced by bone within 24 months.*1,2 at 6 months at at 18 months at Comparisons of absorption, measured via μCT, at 6 and 18 months.3 Suture Anchor Learn more at smith-nephew.com.
  • The Benefit of Arthroscopy for Symptomatic Total Knee Arthroplasty

    The Benefit of Arthroscopy for Symptomatic Total Knee Arthroplasty

    CORE Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided by Elsevier - Publisher Connector Arthroscopy for symptomatic total knee arthroplasty THE BENEFIT OF ARTHROSCOPY FOR SYMPTOMATIC TOTAL KNEE ARTHROPLASTY Hsiu-Peng Teng, Yi-Jiun Chou, Li-Chun Lin, and Chi-Yin Wong Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan. Thirty-one knees with symptomatic total knee arthroplasty were diagnosed and treated arthroscopically. There were 18 knees with soft tissue impingement and 13 knees without. There were 16 knees with painful arthroplasty and range of motion (ROM) greater than 90°. Hypertrophied synovitis with or without impingement was more easily found by arthroscopy in this group than in the other 15 knees with the chief complaint of limited ROM, where more remarkable fibrotic tissue with intra-articular adhesion was found. Overall, the average improvement in ROM was 43.1° immediately after arthroscopy, and 20° at the final follow-up. Symptoms improved in 90.3% of patients, and 58.1% were satisfied with the outcome of their surgery. Arthroscopy is helpful for intra-articular diagnosis, obtaining a specimen for histopatho- logic analysis, culture for subclinical infection, and better improvement in ROM. In our experience, arthros- copy for symptomatic knee arthroplasty is reliable, safe and effective. Key Words: arthroscopy, total knee arthroplasty (Kaohsiung J Med Sci 2004;20:473–7) Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a popular and successful detailed history review, physical examination, and radio- treatment for knee-joint problems. However, a subset of graphic studies (anteroposterior, lateral and Merchant patients will suffer from persistent pain, with or without in- views) to detect possible pathologic conditions (e.g.
  • Patient Guide for a Hip Replacement

    Patient Guide for a Hip Replacement

    Day of surgery: ____________________ Expected discharge home: ____________________ Surgeon: ____________________ Phone number: ____________________ Bring this guide with you to the hospital on the day of your surgery 4100492 (17-10) 2 Introduction This information guide will help you understand what is involved in hip arthroplasty (hip replacement). We hope the information in this booklet will help you prepare for your surgery •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• About Hôpital Montfort Hôpital Montfort is a Francophone academic health care institution that provides quality care in both official languages and works with its partners to improve the health of communities. Montfort strives for excellence and wants to be a hospital of choice for its personalized patient care, its workplace, teaching and research. Our daily actions are guided by the values of compassion, commitment, excellence and respect. WARNING This guide does not replace the advice of your care provider. Please consult your care provider to assess if the information presented in this guide applies to your situation. The content of this guide was prepared by Vancouver Coastal Health and adapted by Hôpital Montfort. 3 Your Health Care: Be Involved! • Be involved in your health care. Speak up if you have questions or concerns about your care. • Tell a member of your health care team about your past illnesses and your current health condition. • Tell your health team if you have any food or medication allergies. • Make sure you know what to do when you leave the hospital. •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• Your Interprofessional Plan of Care • Your hospital admission for your total hip replacement will follow an “interprofessional plan of care” more commonly called a "Clinical Pathway".
  • Musculoskeletal Program CPT Codes and Descriptions

    Musculoskeletal Program CPT Codes and Descriptions

    Musculoskeletal Program CPT Codes and Descriptions Spine Surgery Procedure Codes CPT CODES DESCRIPTION Allograft, morselized, or placement of osteopromotive material, for spine surgery only (List separately in addition 20930 to code for primary procedure) 20931 Allograft, structural, for spine surgery only (List separately in addition to code for primary procedure) Autograft for spine surgery only (includes harvesting the graft); local (eg, ribs, spinous process, or laminar 20936 fragments) obtained from same incision (List separately in addition to code for primary procedure) Autograft for spine surgery only (includes harvesting the graft); morselized (through separate skin or fascial 20937 incision) (List separately in addition to code for primary procedure) Autograft for spine surgery only (includes harvesting the graft); structural, bicortical or tricortical (through separate 20938 skin or fascial incision) (List separately in addition to code for primary procedure) 20974 Electrical stimulation to aid bone healing; noninvasive (nonoperative) Osteotomy of spine, posterior or posterolateral approach, 3 columns, 1 vertebral segment (eg, pedicle/vertebral 22206 body subtraction); thoracic Osteotomy of spine, posterior or posterolateral approach, 3 columns, 1 vertebral segment (eg, pedicle/vertebral 22207 body subtraction); lumbar Osteotomy of spine, posterior or posterolateral approach, 3 columns, 1 vertebral segment (eg, pedicle/vertebral 22208 body subtraction); each additional vertebral segment (List separately in addition to code for
  • Differences Between Subtotal Corpectomy and Laminoplasty for Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy

    Differences Between Subtotal Corpectomy and Laminoplasty for Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy

    Spinal Cord (2010) 48, 214–220 & 2010 International Spinal Cord Society All rights reserved 1362-4393/10 $32.00 www.nature.com/sc ORIGINAL ARTICLE Differences between subtotal corpectomy and laminoplasty for cervical spondylotic myelopathy S Shibuya1, S Komatsubara1, S Oka2, Y Kanda1, N Arima1 and T Yamamoto1 1Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, School of Medicine, Kagawa University, Kagawa, Japan and 2Oka Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Clinic, Kagawa, Japan Objective: This study aimed to obtain guidelines for choosing between subtotal corpectomy (SC) and laminoplasty (LP) by analysing the surgical outcomes, radiological changes and problems associated with each surgical modality. Study Design: A retrospective analysis of two interventional case series. Setting: Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Kagawa University, Japan. Methods: Subjects comprised 34 patients who underwent SC and 49 patients who underwent LP. SC was performed by high-speed drilling to remove vertebral bodies. Autologous strut bone grafting was used. LP was performed as an expansive open-door LP. The level of decompression was from C3 to C7. Clinical evaluations included recovery rate (RR), frequency of C5 root palsy after surgery, re-operation and axial pain. Radiographic assessments included sagittal cervical alignment and bone union. Results: Comparisons between the two groups showed no significant differences in age at surgery, preoperative factors, RR and frequency of C5 palsy. Progression of kyphotic changes, operation time and volumes of blood loss and blood transfusion were significantly greater in the SC (two- or three- level) group. Six patients in the SC group required additional surgery because of pseudoarthrosis, and four patients underwent re-operation because of adjacent level disc degeneration.
  • Clinical Guidelines

    Clinical Guidelines

    CLINICAL GUIDELINES Interventional Pain Management Services Version 1.0.2019 Clinical guidelines for medical necessity review of comprehensive musculoskeletal management services. © 2019 eviCore healthcare. All rights reserved. Regence: Comprehensive Musculoskeletal Management Guidelines V1.0.2019 Interventional Pain Management CMM-200: Epidural Steroid Injections (ESI) 3 CMM-201: Facet Joint Injections/Medial Branch Blocks 17 CMM-202: Trigger Point Injections 21 CMM-203: Sacroiliac Joint Injections 32 CMM-204: Prolotherapy 37 CMM-207: Epidural Adhesiolysis 40 CMM-208: Radiofrequency Joint Ablations/Denervations 44 CMM-209: Regional Sympathetic Blocks 51 CMM 210: Implantable Intrathecal Drug Delivery Systems 57 CMM-211: Spinal Cord Stimulators 65 CMM-308: Thermal Intradiscal Procedures 66 CMM-310: Manipulation of the Spine Under Anesthesia 71 ______________________________________________________________________________________________________ © 2019 eviCore healthcare. All Rights Reserved. Page 2 of 73 400 Buckwalter Place Boulevard, Bluffton, SC 29910 (800) 918-8924 www.eviCore.com Regence: Comprehensive Musculoskeletal Management Guidelines V1.0.2019 CMM-200: Epidural Steroid Injections (ESI) CMM-200.1: Definitions 4 CMM-200.2: General Guidelines 5 CMM-200.3: Indications: Selective Nerve Root Block (SNRB) 6 CMM-200.4: Indications: Epidural Steroid Injections 7 CMM-200.5: Non-Indications: SNRB 8 CMM-200.6: Non-Indications: ESI 8 ® CMM-200.7: Procedure (CPT ) Codes 9 CMM-200.8: References 10 ______________________________________________________________________________________________________
  • TESSYS Technique with Small Grade of Facetectomy Has Potential Biomechanical Advantages Compared to the In-Out TED with Intact Articular Process : an In-Silico Study

    TESSYS Technique with Small Grade of Facetectomy Has Potential Biomechanical Advantages Compared to the In-Out TED with Intact Articular Process : an In-Silico Study

    TESSYS Technique With Small Grade of Facetectomy Has Potential Biomechanical Advantages Compared to the In-Out TED With Intact Articular Process : An In-Silico Study Jingchi Li West China Hospital/West China School of Medicine for Sichuan University Chen Xu Changzheng Hospital Aliated to the Naval Medical University Xiaoyu Zhang Aliated Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine for Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine Zhipeng Xi Aliated Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine for Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine Mengnan Liu Macau University of Science and Technology Zhongxin Fang Xihua University Nan Wang Aliated Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine for Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine Lin Xie ( [email protected] ) Aliated Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine for Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine Yueming Song West China Hospital/West China School of Medicine for Sichuan University Research Article Keywords: Biomechanical deterioration, Transforaminal endoscopic discectomy, Endoscopic dynamic drill, Facetectomy, Iatrogenic annulus injury Posted Date: April 26th, 2021 Page 1/27 DOI: https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-429749/v1 License: This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Read Full License Version of Record: A version of this preprint was published at BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders on July 10th, 2021. See the published version at https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-021-04504-1. Page 2/27 Abstract Background: The facetectomy was reported as an important procedure in both in-out and out-in (i.e. transforaminal endoscopic spine system (TESSYS)) techniques in the transforaminal endoscopic discectomy (TED), and which was also related to the deterioration of postoperative biomechanical environment and related poor prognosis.