Appeal type: Experimental/Investigational
Decision: Upheld

Diagnosis: Low back pain.

Treatment: intraosseous basivertebral nerve ablation, code 64628.

The insurer denied coverage for intraosseous basivertebral nerve ablation, code 64628.

The denial is upheld.

In assessing whether intraosseous basivertebral nerve ablation using the Intracept device is considered more beneficial for this patient than standard treatments or procedures, it is important to know that the publications in peer-reviewed literature to date have been mostly company sponsored, have had methodologic flaws, and were at risk for confirmation bias. UpToDate does not support the use of radiofrequency ablation for low back pain. Despite Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval, there are many exclusion criteria.

For individuals who have vertebrogenic low back pain who receive ablation of basivertebral nerves(BVN), the evidence includes two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) (SMART and INTRACEPT trials, both sponsored by device manufacturer Relievant Medsystems, Inc.). Relevant outcomes were symptoms, functional outcomes, quality of life and treatment-related morbidity. In one RCT, at 12 months, 73% of patients crossed over to the active treatment group and therefore long-term comparative data is not available. Limitations to the other RCT include lack of a sham control and short duration of follow-up. The evidence is insufficient to determine that the technology results in an improvement in the net health outcome.


Basivertebral nerve (BVN) ablation using the Intracept procedure is FDA approved in a very select group of patients who have - A history of chronic low back pain (cLBP) of at least 6 months duration; and - Failed to respond to at least 6 months of non-surgical management; and - magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) demonstrated Modic Type 1 or Type 2 changes at one or more vertebrae from L3 to S1; and - Activities of daily living that are limited by persistent low back pain; and - All other reasonable sources of pain have been ruled out. 

Based on these criteria this patient is not a good candidate for intraosseous basivertebral nerve ablation. 

There are other evidence-based treatments available to this patient. This procedure is unlikely to be more beneficial than the standard approaches. 

The basivertebral nerve ablation procedure with the Intracept device is not the best available treatment for this patient based on evidence in the medical record of other pain etiology. Clinic notes provided state that the patient has low back pain left greater than right with left buttock and thigh radiation. MRI shows L5-S1 disc bulge and central disc protrusion, mild stenosis of left subarticular recess, moderate left and mild right neural foraminal stenosis. Disc extrusion or protrusion and radicular pain were considered exclusion criteria in the INTRACEPT study by Kahlil et al

There are other evidence-based medications and treatments available to this patient. This procedure is unlikely to be more beneficial than the standard approaches. 

Any invasive procedure has risk of bleeding, infection, nerve injury or retained foreign body compared to non-invasive treatments.

The supporting publications to date have been mostly company sponsored, have had methodologic flaws, and were at risk for confirmation bias. UpToDate does not support the use of radiofrequency ablation for low back pain. 

Furthermore, with evidence of radicular pain and other possible pain etiology (disc protrusion at L5-S1) this patient would have been excluded from the INTRACEPT trial and therefore the Intracept procedure is unlikely to be more beneficial than standard treatments/procedures for this patient.

In summary, the denial of intraosseous basivertebral nerve ablation, code 64628 and coverage for the requested service/treatment should be upheld. This treatment is not likely to be more beneficial than any standard treatments for this patient's condition and the adverse risks are substantially increased over standard treatments.