Were procedures 64633 (Destruction by neurolytic agent, paravertebral facet joint nerve, single facet joint) and 64634 (Destruction by neurolytic agent, paravertebral facet joint nerve, each additional facet joint) medically necessary for the treatment of cervical facet joint pain?

Medical Advisory BoardAll articles are reviewed for accuracy by our Medical Advisory Board
Educational purpose only • Exercise caution as content is pending human review
Article Review Status
Submitted
Under Review
Approved

Last updated: December 20, 2025View editorial policy

Personalize

Help us tailor your experience

Which best describes you? Your choice helps us use language that's most understandable for you.

Medical Necessity Determination for Cervical Radiofrequency Ablation (CPT 64633/64634)

The left-sided cervical C2-6 radiofrequency ablation performed on this patient was medically necessary and meets established clinical criteria. The patient satisfied all required prerequisites including failed conservative management, documented positive response to two separate diagnostic medial branch blocks with >80% pain relief, and appropriate symptom duration exceeding 3 months 1, 2.

Critical Documentation Review

Diagnostic Criteria Met

The patient fulfilled the essential diagnostic requirements for cervical facet-mediated pain:

  • Two positive diagnostic medial branch blocks documented: The patient underwent bilateral cervical medial branch blocks on two separate occasions with documented 80% pain relief on the left side and 70% on the right side, meeting the double-injection technique threshold of ≥80% relief for the treated side 3, 2.

  • Appropriate symptom duration: Chronic neck pain persisting for multiple years (since motor vehicle accident 3 years prior) with progressive worsening, far exceeding the 3-month minimum requirement 1.

  • Failed conservative management: Documentation shows trials of multiple conservative treatments including topical CBD-infused salve, gabapentin, and previous chiropractic care with only 30-40% relief, meeting the requirement for failed conservative therapy 1, 4.

  • Imaging excludes alternative pathology: X-ray imaging showed no advanced degenerative changes, no significant vertebral body height loss, and only minimal retrolisthesis without significant dynamic motion, effectively ruling out other obvious causes of pain 3, 1.

Procedural Appropriateness

The radiofrequency ablation was performed according to established standards:

  • Appropriate anatomic levels: The procedure targeted C2-6 medial branch nerves on the left side (5 levels), which is within acceptable limits as guidelines permit treatment of multiple levels when clinically indicated 5, 2.

  • Proper technique utilized: Fluoroscopic guidance was employed throughout the procedure, which is mandatory for all facet joint interventions with Level I evidence supporting its use 3, 4.

  • Correct procedural sequence: The patient progressed appropriately from diagnostic blocks to definitive radiofrequency ablation after demonstrating positive response to diagnostic injections, following the recommended treatment algorithm 4, 2.

Evidence Supporting Medical Necessity

Diagnostic Accuracy

The double-injection technique with controlled local anesthetic blocks represents the gold standard for diagnosing cervical facet-mediated pain, with Level I or II-1 evidence supporting this approach 2. The patient's documented 80% pain relief on the left side with ability to perform previously painful movements meets the established diagnostic threshold 1, 2.

Therapeutic Efficacy

Radiofrequency ablation is the definitive treatment for confirmed facet-mediated pain:

  • Conventional radiofrequency neurotomy demonstrates Level II-1 or II-2 evidence for cervical facet pain management, with studies showing 85% of cervical cases achieving at least 50% improvement in symptoms for extended periods 6, 2.

  • Excellent responders to cervical radiofrequency ablation experience an average duration of 10.8 months of relief (range 3-34 months), while good responders average 6.5 months (range 3-22 months) 6.

  • The evidence for radiofrequency neurotomy is significantly stronger than for intraarticular facet injections, which have limited evidence for long-term efficacy 3, 7, 2.

Clinical Presentation Consistency

The patient's clinical presentation is entirely consistent with cervical facet-mediated pain: unilateral neck pain (predominantly left-sided), pain with neck extension and rotation, absence of radiculopathy, and significant functional impairment affecting activities of daily living 1, 7.

Important Clinical Considerations

Distinction from Therapeutic Injections

A critical distinction must be made between diagnostic/therapeutic medial branch blocks and definitive radiofrequency ablation:

  • The patient appropriately progressed through the diagnostic algorithm with two positive medial branch blocks before proceeding to radiofrequency ablation 4, 2.

  • Radiofrequency ablation represents definitive treatment, not a diagnostic procedure, and is indicated after positive response to diagnostic blocks 4, 5.

  • The evidence for therapeutic medial branch blocks is Level II-1, while radiofrequency neurotomy has comparable or superior evidence (Level II-1 or II-2) with longer duration of benefit 2.

Bilateral vs. Unilateral Treatment

The patient underwent left-sided radiofrequency ablation first, which is appropriate given the asymmetric response to diagnostic blocks (80% relief left vs. 70% right) 1. The documentation indicates plans for subsequent right-sided treatment if the left-sided procedure proves successful, which represents a staged and clinically appropriate approach 1.

Diagnosis Code Appropriateness

The diagnosis code M47.812 (Spondylosis without myelopathy or radiculopathy, cervical region) is appropriate for this clinical scenario, as it accurately reflects cervical degenerative changes without neurologic compromise, which is consistent with facet-mediated pain 1, 7.

Procedural Safety Profile

Radiofrequency thermocoagulation of cervical medial branches demonstrates an excellent safety profile with minimal complications 6. In the largest retrospective series, only 2 of 63 cervical cases experienced short-term neuritis that resolved within weeks, with no significant long-term adverse effects reported 6.

Comparison to Alternative Treatments

Radiofrequency ablation is superior to repeated therapeutic injections:

  • Intraarticular cervical facet injections have limited evidence for long-term efficacy and should only be performed in the context of clinical research 7, 2.

  • Therapeutic medial branch blocks provide temporary relief (average 15 weeks per injection for lumbar cases), requiring repeated procedures 3, 4.

  • Radiofrequency ablation provides significantly longer duration of relief (average 6.5-10.8 months) compared to repeated injections, making it more cost-effective and clinically appropriate for confirmed facet-mediated pain 6.

References

Guideline

Medical Necessity of Cervical Facet Joint Injections for Cervical Spondylosis and Cervicalgia

Praxis Medical Insights: Practical Summaries of Clinical Guidelines, 2025

Guideline

Medical Necessity of Lumbar Facet Joint Injection

Praxis Medical Insights: Practical Summaries of Clinical Guidelines, 2025

Guideline

Treatment for Mild Facet Joint Hypertrophy

Praxis Medical Insights: Practical Summaries of Clinical Guidelines, 2025

Research

Radiofrequency neurolysis for facet arthropathy: a retrospective case series and review of the literature.

Pain practice : the official journal of World Institute of Pain, 2002

Research

5. Cervical facet pain.

Pain practice : the official journal of World Institute of Pain, 2010

Professional Medical Disclaimer

This information is intended for healthcare professionals. Any medical decision-making should rely on clinical judgment and independently verified information. The content provided herein does not replace professional discretion and should be considered supplementary to established clinical guidelines. Healthcare providers should verify all information against primary literature and current practice standards before application in patient care. Dr.Oracle assumes no liability for clinical decisions based on this content.

Have a follow-up question?

Our Medical A.I. is used by practicing medical doctors at top research institutions around the world. Ask any follow up question and get world-class guideline-backed answers instantly.