UNSPSC 85592716: Dilation of esophagogastric junction with intraluminal device, via natural or artificial opening

This classification denotes the group of activities that yields a surgical intervention or procedure to dilation of esophagogastric junction with intraluminal device, via natural or artificial opening. 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 0D747DZ

UNSPSC 85592716 Dilation of esophagogastric junction with intraluminal device, via natural or artificial opening is a Commodity code that shows little relevant recent activity under state and local procurement. The code nominally describes a specific esophageal medical procedure, but the recent opportunities tagged to it span independent medical evaluation services for public safety pension boards, surgical and medical procedure carve-outs for government employee health plans, occupational medical surveillance for ferry system employees, emergency and inpatient hospital services for detained youth, pharmacy benefit management, and temporary health professional staffing. These solicitations involve medical administration, benefits management, occupational health compliance, and clinical staffing—not the targeted esophageal intervention the code nominally describes.

The issuing bodies include a municipal retirement office (City of Phoenix), a city employee benefits program (City of Long Beach), a state transportation agency (Washington State Department of Transportation), a county juvenile probation department (Harris County), a county board of commissioners (Collier County), and a county health system (Santa Clara). Geographic spread spans Arizona, California, Washington, Texas, and Florida. None of the recent opportunities align with endoscopic esophageal dilation procedures typically performed in hospital outpatient or ambulatory surgery settings. The mismatch between the code's clinical specificity and the actual scope of work being solicited suggests the code may have been applied incorrectly to these opportunities, or the code itself carries outdated or misaligned tagging within state and local procurement systems.