UNSPSC 85553310: Revision of drainage device in right extraocular muscle, percutaneous approach

This classification denotes the group of activities that yields a surgical intervention or procedure to revision of drainage device in right extraocular muscle, percutaneous 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 08WL30Z

UNSPSC 85553310 Revision of drainage device in right extraocular muscle, percutaneous approach is a Commodity code that exhibits no relevant recent state and local procurement activity. The recent opportunities tagged to this code span independent medical evaluation services for disability pension determinations, occupational medical surveillance for ferry workers, surgical benefit carve-out networks, pharmacy benefit management, specialty and emergency medical services for detained youth, and temporary health professional staffing — none of which align with ophthalmologic surgical procedures or extraocular muscle intervention. The code's nominal scope concerns a specific ophthalmic surgical procedure, but the opportunities posted under it reflect broad administrative and occupational health contracting by jurisdictions ranging from city retirement offices and county health systems to state transportation departments.

State and local procurement tagged to this code shows no concentration in any geographic region or issuing-body type. The recent solicitations originate from Arizona (City of Phoenix), California (City of Long Beach, County of Santa Clara), Washington State Department of Transportation, Texas (Harris County), and Florida (Collier County), and they target health benefits administration, occupational surveillance, medical evaluations, and staffing — services entirely outside the narrow surgical procedure this code describes. No evidence in the source supports that state and local governments are actively procuring extraocular muscle revision procedures under this code, and the mismatch between the code's clinical specificity and the administrative health-services nature of recent opportunities suggests either systematic misclassification or dormancy of the code itself in the state and local marketplace.