UNSPSC 85523023: Removal of extraluminal device from upper vein, percutaneous endoscopic approach

This classification denotes the group of activities that yields a surgical intervention or procedure to removal of extraluminal device from upper vein, percutaneous endoscopic approach. This surgical intervention or procedure is listed in the World Health Organization's International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems or ICD-10 as code 05PY4CZ

UNSPSC 85523023 Removal of extraluminal device from upper vein, percutaneous endoscopic approach (Commodity) does not align with recent state and local procurement activity. The code's nominal scope — a specific surgical procedure for vascular device removal — does not match the actual work being solicited under this code designation. Recent state and local opportunities posted against this code include independent medical evaluation services for disability pension determinations, surgical benefit network management for municipal employees, occupational health surveillance for state ferry workers, emergency and specialty medical services for detained youth, pharmacy benefit management, and temporary health professional staffing across ancillary clinical categories. These solicitations span health plan administration, occupational medicine compliance, behavioral health, and clinical staffing — none of which involve removal of extraluminal devices from upper veins or match the procedural specificity of the code itself. The mismatch suggests either a systematic coding error by the jurisdictions issuing these opportunities or a data integrity issue in how the code has been applied to these opportunities in the procurement notices.

The issuing bodies include a city retirement office (Phoenix), a municipal health authority (Long Beach), a state transportation department (Washington), a county juvenile probation department (Harris County, Texas), a county board of commissioners (Collier County, Florida), and a county health system (Santa Clara, California). No clear pattern of repeat buyers or geographic concentration emerges from these six opportunities. The code shows little relevant procurement activity aligned with its stated scope, and pursuit decisions should reflect the disconnect between the code's procedural definition and what state and local governments are actually soliciting under it.