Is the right SI joint injection iFuse Implant system (CPT 27279) and inpatient level of care medically necessary for a patient with pain of the right sacroiliac joint and degeneration of intervertebral disc of the thoracic region?

Medical Necessity Determination for CPT 27279 and Inpatient Level of Care

Primary Recommendation

The requested iFuse Implant System (CPT 27279) is NOT medically necessary at this time, and inpatient level of care is NOT indicated. The patient fails to meet critical diagnostic criteria required by the insurance policy, most notably lacking the required 70% pain relief threshold from diagnostic SI joint injections and missing documentation of nicotine-free status. 1, 2

---

Critical Deficiencies in Meeting Medical Necessity Criteria

Insufficient Diagnostic Confirmation (POLICY NOT MET)

The patient reported only 80-90% pain relief "temporarily" from SI joint injections, which does not meet the policy requirement for sustained response. 1, 2

• The policy explicitly requires "improvement in lower back pain numeric rating scale (NRS) of at least 70% of the pre-injection NRS score after two separate fluoroscopic or CT controlled injections" with documented duration of relief 1
• The American College of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation mandates at least 70-80% pain relief from diagnostic SI joint injections to confirm the SI joint as the primary pain generator before considering fusion 1
• Only ONE injection is documented, not the required TWO separate diagnostic injections 1, 2
• The term "temporarily" suggests inadequate duration of relief - the policy requires at least 50% relief for at least 2 months to justify repeat therapeutic injection, and even more stringent criteria for fusion 3, 4
• Dual comparative blocks with >70-80% concordant pain relief provide diagnostic specificity of 78% for SI joint as the pain generator and are necessary before surgical intervention 2

Competing Pain Generators Not Adequately Ruled Out (POLICY NOT MET)

The thoracic disc degeneration represents a significant confounding pain generator that has not been properly evaluated or excluded. 1, 2

• MRI shows disc degeneration at T7-T8 and T9-T10 with mild central disc protrusion, focal kyphosis, and mild spinal cord flattening 1
• The policy requires that "other causes of low back pain have been ruled out, including lumbar disc degeneration, lumbar disc herniation, lumbar spondylolisthesis, lumbar spinal stenosis, lumbar facet degeneration" 1
• No documentation of diagnostic testing with facet/medial branch blocks or interlaminar epidural injections to rule out thoracic spine as pain generator 1, 2
• The patient's description of pain radiating down the leg with calf/knee locking suggests possible neural compression that may originate from thoracic pathology 5
• When the SI joint is not confirmed as the primary pain generator through proper diagnostic blocks, other causes must be thoroughly evaluated before proceeding to fusion 1

Missing Nicotine Status Documentation (POLICY NOT MET - MARKED "UNSURE")

The policy explicitly requires nicotine-free status for at least 1 year prior to surgery with laboratory confirmation. 1

• For persons with recent nicotine use, documentation must include "a lab report (not surgeon summary) showing blood or urinary nicotine level of less than or equal to 10 ng/ml (or urinary cotinine levels of less than or equal to 10 ng/ml) drawn within 6 weeks prior to surgery" 1
• No documentation of nicotine status or laboratory testing is provided in the submitted materials 1
• This criterion is marked "UNSURE" in the policy checklist, indicating it has not been verified 1

Inadequate Radiologic Evidence of SI Joint Degeneration

The policy requires "radiologic evidence of SI joint degeneration on imaging," but the submitted documentation only mentions thoracic disc degeneration. 1

• No specific imaging findings of SI joint degeneration, arthropathy, or structural abnormality are documented 1
• The MRI report focuses entirely on thoracic spine pathology with no mention of SI joint findings 1
• Plain X-rays of the pelvis including the ipsilateral hip are required to exclude concomitant hip pathology - not documented 1

---

Appropriate Next Steps Before Considering Fusion

Required Diagnostic Workup

A second confirmatory diagnostic SI joint injection with fluoroscopic or CT guidance must be performed with documented 70% pain relief. 1, 2

• Both injections must be isolated to only the SI joint (not combined with other injections at the same time such as hip, trochanteric bursa, or lumbar spine) 1
• At least one injection must be therapeutic and include a steroid 1
• Duration of relief must be documented and should exceed 2 months to support consideration of fusion 3, 4

Thoracic spine must be evaluated as a potential pain generator through appropriate diagnostic interventions. 1, 2

• Given the documented T7-T8 and T9-T10 disc degeneration with cord compression, facet/medial branch blocks or epidural injections should be performed 1
• The policy requires documentation that "other neighboring motion segments have been evaluated and ruled out as potential pain generators" 1

Complete imaging evaluation per policy requirements:

• Plain X-rays of pelvis including ipsilateral hip to exclude hip pathology 1
• Dedicated SI joint imaging (plain films, CT, or MRI) documenting degenerative changes 1
• Confirmation that sacroiliac pathology is not caused by autoimmune disease, neoplasia, or crystal arthropathy 1

Therapeutic Trial Before Fusion

Therapeutic SI joint injections with corticosteroid should be pursued as the next step given the positive initial response. 2, 4

• According to the Spine Intervention Society, repeat injection with steroid is appropriate if there was at least 50% relief for at least 2 months after the first injection 3, 4
• Prolotherapy with dextrose water has shown superior results (64% achieving 50% pain relief at 6 months) compared to corticosteroid injections (27%) and represents an evidence-based alternative before considering fusion 3, 2
• Peri-articular SI joint injections may be more appropriate than intra-articular injections given the bilateral tenderness pattern, as peri-articular techniques have shown response rates up to 100% compared to 36% for intra-articular injections 2

Nicotine Status Verification

Laboratory confirmation of nicotine-free status must be obtained and documented. 1

• Blood or urinary nicotine level ≤10 ng/ml or urinary cotinine ≤10 ng/ml drawn within 6 weeks prior to any planned surgery 1
• If patient is not nicotine-free for at least 1 year, fusion should be deferred until this criterion is met 1

---

Level of Care Determination: Outpatient Only

Inpatient level of care is NOT medically necessary for SI joint fusion procedures. 1

• The MCG guideline specifically designates SI joint fusion as "Ambulatory" (outpatient) 1
• The policy notes that "main code GLOS/BLOS is Ambulatory" 1
• Minimally invasive SI joint fusion using the iFuse Implant System is designed as an outpatient procedure with same-day discharge 6, 7
• In published case series, patients underwent iFuse implantation as outpatient procedures without complications requiring inpatient admission 6, 7

Number of inpatient stays: ZERO (0) - procedure should be performed in ambulatory/outpatient setting if medical necessity criteria are eventually met. 1

---

Common Pitfalls and Clinical Caveats

Diagnostic Accuracy Concerns

Proceeding directly to fusion without dual diagnostic blocks is a treatment pitfall that reduces diagnostic accuracy and surgical success rates. 2

• Only 15-30% of patients with low back pain have SI joint as the primary pain generator 5, 7
• Without proper diagnostic confirmation, patients may undergo unnecessary surgery with persistent symptoms post-operatively 1
• In one case series, only 55% of patients achieved minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for pain scores after fusion, with failures attributed to malpositioned implants, associated lumbar pathology, or inaccurate diagnosis 7

Multiple Pain Generators

The presence of thoracic disc pathology with cord compression creates significant diagnostic uncertainty. 1, 2

• The patient's symptoms of leg pain, calf locking, and severe neuropathy in both feet may originate from thoracic myelopathy rather than SI joint pathology 1
• 35% of patients in one series required secondary procedures after SI joint fusion, often due to unrecognized competing pain generators 7
• Misdiagnosis of the pain generator leads to unnecessary surgery and persistent symptoms post-operatively 1

Physical Therapy Considerations

The documentation states physical therapy "aggravated his pain," but the policy requires at least 3 months of formal in-person physical therapy. 1

• Focused pelvic stabilization physical therapy specifically targeting the SI joint should be implemented rather than general back therapy 2
• The type and quality of physical therapy matters - generic lumbar protocols may indeed worsen SI joint pain 2
• Comprehensive rehabilitation addressing pelvic mechanics is crucial even if fusion is eventually performed 2

---

Summary of Policy Compliance

Criterion	Status	Evidence
Two separate diagnostic injections with ≥70% relief	NOT MET	Only one injection documented [1]
Duration of relief documented	NOT MET	"Temporarily" does not meet threshold [1]
Other pain generators ruled out	NOT MET	Thoracic pathology not evaluated [1]
Radiologic evidence of SI joint degeneration	NOT MET	No SI joint imaging findings documented [1]
Nicotine-free status verified	NOT MET	No laboratory documentation [1]
6 months conservative treatment	MET	Physical therapy, medications, injections attempted [1]
Baseline pain ≥5/10	MET	Pain level 7/10 documented [1]
≥3 positive physical exam maneuvers	MET	Thigh thrust, Fabers, lateral compression positive [3,1]

The patient meets only 3 of 8 critical policy requirements for SI joint fusion. The procedure is NOT medically necessary at this time. 1