The 2017 CPT (Currently Procedural Terminology) AMA Codebook contains the first endoscopic spinal surgery code.
AMA Issues First Endoscopic Spine CPT Code

That’s according to joimax GmbH, a maker of endoscopic equipment, as the company announced the new code in a September 26, 2016 press release.
The AMA (American Medical Association) helps the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) figure out how to pay for specific surgical procedures through the codes. If you want to get paid, you need the code. The code that the AMA approved is code #62380. The new code covers endoscopic decompression of the spinal cord, nerve root(s), including laminotomy, partial facetectomy, foraminotomy, discectomy and/or excision of herniated intervertebral disc, 1 interspace, lumbar, and will be enforced as of January 1, 2017.
Under this code the company’s transforaminal (TESSYS) and/or interlaminar (iLESSYS) procedures are fully covered, according to the release.
joimax’s founder and CEO Wolfgang Ries said, “The definition of this new code in the CPT codebook 2017 is a major milestone towards the acceptance of endoscopic minimally invasive spine surgery techniques and its benefits to both the surgeon and their patients.”
We asked Ries if the new code will cannibalize existing codes. He told us that code 62830 will not cannibalize any previous codes, but that code 63030 will start to plateau over the next 2-3 years and then eventually decline over 4-5 years. He said the reason for that is that the use of endoscopic procedures will start to gain momentum over microscopic procedures.
Daniel Laich, DO, of Swedish Convenant Hospital, Chicago, participated and presented in almost every AMA meeting over the last five years. He said that due to the “high research and publication activities” by key users like Albert Telfeian, M.D., Ph.D, at Rhode Island Hospital at Brown University, and a group of users around him, “strong evidence has been accepted by AMA authorities, justifying the release of this new CPT code.”

Discussion
This is a fascinating development. In my practice we've seen similar outcomes with the revised protocol. The key differentiator seems to be patient selection criteria. Has anyone else noticed the correlation with BMI thresholds?
Great point. I'd push back slightly on the conclusion, the sample size in the cited study is too small to draw population-level inferences. That said, the directional signal is compelling and worth a larger RCT.
We implemented a similar approach last year. Early results are promising but we're still gathering 12-month follow-up data. Happy to share our protocol if anyone is interested.
Join the conversation
Orthopedic professionals are discussing this. Sign in and upgrade to read every comment and add your voice.