LinkedInXFacebook
Subscribe
Orthopedics This Week
  • My Feed
  • |Posts
  • |Events
  • |MSK Innovations
  • |Power Rankings
  • |Masterclasses
  • |Technology Awards
  • Press Releases
  • |Advertising
  • |Job Board
  • Spine
  • ◆Joints
  • ◆Upper Extremities
  • ◆Foot & Ankle
  • ◆Sports Medicine
  • ◆Pain Mgmt
  • ◆Trauma
  • ◆Biologics
  • ◆Technology
  • ◆People
  • ◆Company News
  • ◆Legal & Regulatory
Home/Legal & Regulatory and Reimbursement/TRICARE Covers Aesculap Lumbar TDR
Legal & Regulatory and Reimbursement

TRICARE Covers Aesculap Lumbar TDR

June 13, 2018 2 min read Premium comments

Advertisement

TRICARE Covers Aesculap Lumbar TDR
(L to R): TRICARE, activL Artificial Disc, and Aesculap / Courtesy of TRICARE and Aesculap Implant Systems, LLC
Secondary#cms#aesculap#tricare

Nearly ten million active duty and retired military members and their families now have access to Aesculap Implant Systems, LLC’s lumbar total disc replacement (TDR), the activL Artificial Disc.

On June 4, 2018, three years after FDA approval, the company announced that TRICARE now covers the disc for those individuals in need of lumbar TDR (CPT procedure code 22857).

The company said it met with the U.S. Defense Health Agency in late 2017 to provide decision makers with updated long-term evidence supporting the broader adoption of lumbar TDR for single-level degenerative disc disease (DDD).

“Evidence presented to the Agency included level 1a meta-analytic data demonstrating the superiority of Lumbar TDR to fusion in this patient population and five-year adjacent segment disease data from the activL Artificial Disc Investigational Device Exemption (IDE) study,” stated the company.

After performing its due diligence, the company said the Agency published a policy on May 8, 2018, stating that they found lumbar TDR to be proven and medically necessary.

Kim Norton, the company’s reimbursement and payer relations executive, said along with TRICARE, numerous commercial insurance plans have recently adopted positive coverage policies for lumbar TDR over the last year. “Over 30 million more Americans now have access to this procedure due to the overwhelming evidence and our efforts,” said Norton.

The TRICARE policy is retroactive to November 2017.

TRICARE Leading the Way

Advertisement

The military coverage analysts seem to be ahead of their government and civilian colleagues.

In August 2007, CMS (Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services) issued a national non-coverage decision for lumbar artificial disc replacement, saying the surgery was not reasonable and necessary for the Medicare population over 60 years of age.

As recently as January 2018, the largest private health insurer in the U.S., UnitedHealthcare, reaffirmed its coverage decision about lumbar artificial discs:

“Lumbar artificial total disc replacement is unproven and not medically necessary for treating single or multiple level degenerative disc disease in skeletally mature patients. The long-term clinical outcome of lumbar disc replacement is unclear.”

In 2015, we wrote that Jack Zigler, M.D., Texas Back Institute’s medical director, said insurance approval for lumbar arthroplasty has failed to gain traction, “despite long term data showing maintenance of dramatically improved outcomes at five years in both fusion and arthroplasty groups (although better in the ADR [artificial disc replacement] patients), and statistically significantly reduced adjacent level radiographic degenerative changes above the ADR’s than above the fusions.”

In this case, TRICARE is marching to its own tune. The military led the way with integration over 60 years ago. Today they’re leading the way with insurance coverage.

React:

Discussion

14
DS
Dr. Sarah MitchellOrthopedic Surgeon · Mayo Clinic

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?

8
JT
James Thornton, MDSpine Fellow · HSS

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.

5
RP
R. PatelSports Medicine · Stanford

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.

Subscribe

Get Full Access

Read every OTW article and join member discussions for $24.99/month.

Get Full Access

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Orthopedics This Week

The most trusted source in orthopedic industry news since 2005. Covering spine, joints, trauma, biologics, and the business of orthopedics.

A publication of RRY Publications, LLC

LinkedInXFacebook

Categories

  • Spine
  • Joints
  • Upper Extremities
  • Foot & Ankle
  • Sports Medicine
  • Pain Mgmt
  • Trauma
  • Biologics
  • Technology
  • People
  • Company News
  • Legal & Regulatory

Resources

  • Subscribe
  • Community Posts
  • Job Board
  • Press Release Opportunities
  • Power Rankings
  • About OTW
  • Advertise
  • Contact Us

Get Full Access

Unlimited articles, community posts, and Power Rankings.

Get Full Access

Plans start at $24.99/mo · Annual saves 20%

© 2026 Orthopedics This Week · RRY Publications, LLC

Privacy PolicyTerms of ServiceCookie Policy