Lysis of Epidural Lesions (Epidural Adhesiolysis)
Customize your policy alerts
Sign up for Ambetter Nevada Policy CP.MP.116 alerts
Get alerted when Policy CP.MP.116 changes without checking for updates manually.
Monitor payer policy activity
Defines the health plan's coverage stance and clinical background for percutaneous and endoscopic lysis of epidural adhesions for patients with chronic low back and/or lower extremity pain; applies to providers submitting claims to Ambetter Nevada (Centene-affiliated health plans).
No material clinical or coverage changes in this revision.
Coverage determination
Coverage stance
Policy statement
Direct policy sentence from document.
No explicit procedure-specific exclusions are listed in this policy beyond the overarching determination that current medical literature does not support the efficacy of lysis of epidural lesions. The document’s primary policy statement frames percutaneous and endoscopic epidural adhesiolysis (with or without an indwelling Racz catheter) as not supported by evidence, and that statement is the basis for determining coverage rather than a separate list of excluded procedure variants.
The policy’s coverage rationale is based on a review of the medical literature and concludes that current medical literature does not support the efficacy of lysis of epidural lesions. This conclusion applies to both percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis and endoscopic epidural adhesiolysis (with or without an indwelling epidural Racz catheter) and is the foundation for the policy’s non-coverage position.
NOT COVERED: Lysis of epidural lesions, including both percutaneous epidural adhesiolysis and endoscopic epidural adhesiolysis (with or without an indwelling epidural Racz catheter), is positioned as not supported by the current medical literature and therefore is not covered under this policy.
When state Medicaid coverage provisions conflict with this clinical policy, state Medicaid coverage provisions take precedence. For Medicare members, applicable Medicare National Coverage Determinations (NCDs), Local Coverage Determinations (LCDs), and Coverage Articles should be reviewed and followed where applicable prior to applying this clinical policy.
Relevant procedure codes
| 62263 | Percutaneous lysis of epidural adhesions using solution injection (eg, hypertonic saline, enzyme) or mechanical means (eg, catheter) including radiologic localization (includes contrast when administered), multiple adhesiolysis sessions; 2 or more days. |
| 62264 | Percutaneous lysis of epidural adhesions using solution injection (eg, hypertonic saline, enzyme) or mechanical means (eg, catheter) including radiologic localization (includes contrast when administered), multiple adhesiolysis sessions; 1 day. |
What providers must do
Verify prior authorization and follow plan administrative policies
This clinical policy is a guide to medical necessity used to assist coverage decisions; providers must verify prior authorization requirements with the Health Plan and follow applicable administrative policies and member coverage documents.
- Confirm any plan-specific prior authorization rules before scheduling or performing the procedure.
- Adhere to terms, conditions, exclusions and limitations in the member's coverage documents.
Conservative therapy context — document failed conservative treatment
The literature and guidelines cited consider adhesiolysis primarily for patients who have failed conservative therapy; ASIPP rates evidence higher for use after failure of conservative treatment and following fluoroscopically guided epidural injections.
- Document prior conservative treatments and response before claiming adhesiolysis as the next step.
- Note that ASIPP guidance specifically addresses percutaneous adhesiolysis after failure of conservative therapy.
Coding and documentation guidance — include CPT codes and supporting records
Include the appropriate CPT code(s) on the claim and retain supporting clinical documentation demonstrating the procedure performed and medical necessity.
Documentation of medical necessity per accepted standards and guidelines
Document medical necessity consistent with generally accepted standards of medical practice and evidence-based guidelines; follow the Health Plan's administrative policies and member coverage documents when justifying the service.
- Provide clinical rationale referencing prior treatments, diagnostic findings, and expected benefit.
- Ensure documentation aligns with evidence-based guidelines and plan criteria.
Denial risk — lack of supportive medical literature
Claims may be denied because the policy states current medical literature does not support the efficacy of lysis of epidural lesions, including percutaneous and endoscopic adhesiolysis.
- Be prepared to provide strong supporting evidence and detailed documentation if requesting coverage.
- Understand that lack of supportive literature is a stated basis for non-coverage determinations.
Denial risk — follow state Medicaid provisions when applicable
For Medicaid members, when state Medicaid coverage provisions conflict with this clinical policy, state Medicaid provisions take precedence; claims inconsistent with state Medicaid manual provisions may be denied.
- Review the state Medicaid manual for any differing coverage provisions before submitting claims for Medicaid members.
- Expect plan-level Medicaid precedence to govern when conflicts exist.
Provider action — confirm coding guidance and document clinical judgment
Providers should reference current professional coding guidance and the clinical policy when preparing claims; ensure licensure and exercise professional judgment in treatment decisions.
- Check the latest CPT manuals and payer-specific coding instructions prior to claim submission.
- Maintain licensure and document clinical decision-making in the medical record.
Prior conservative therapy considerations
Conservative treatment requirements
Considered in literature primarily for patients who have failed conservative therapy; policy emphasizes lack of supportive efficacy
Hayes review and ASIPP guideline update summarize evidence context.
Supports cautious consideration after failed conservative therapy; does not establish efficacy.
Guideline context but recognizes limitations of evidence and absence of guidance for endoscopic technique.
Visualization and imaging for the procedure
Imaging requirement — fluoroscopy or endoscopic visualization per technique
Use fluoroscopic radiologic localization for percutaneous procedures or endoscopic visualization for epiduroscopy as appropriate to the technique; imaging guidance is included in the CPT descriptions.
- Document the use of fluoroscopy or endoscopy in operative and imaging reports.
- Note that CPT descriptions include radiologic localization (includes contrast when administered).
Procedure definitions
Epidural adhesiolysis (also called epidural neuroplasty or caudal neuroplasty) is an interventional technique intended to mechanically or chemically disrupt epidural scar and adhesions that may contribute to chronic low back and/or lower extremity pain. Techniques described in the literature include solution injection (for example, hypertonic saline or enzymatic agents), catheter manipulation, and endoscopic visualization via epiduroscopy; some protocols describe placement of a catheter for serial sessions to deliver therapeutic agents or perform repeat adhesiolysis.
Procedure frequency and session distinctions
Non-covered services
It is the policy of the Health Plan that lysis of epidural lesions (percutaneous and endoscopic epidural adhesiolysis) is not supported by current medical literature. This policy statement applies regardless of technique and includes procedures performed with or without an indwelling epidural Racz catheter.
OpenPayer is powered by Trek Health's payer performance platform. Trek continuously ingests, validates, and normalizes Transparency in Coverage data alongside payer policies and other commercial payer data to create a structured payer intelligence foundation. OpenPayer uses this foundation to deliver personalized search results, dynamically generated policy pages, and tailored policy monitoring based on each user's payers, specialties, billing codes, and areas of interest. The same intelligence powers broader payer performance workflows, including reimbursement benchmarking, contract evaluation, payer negotiations, and financial decision-making.