UNSPSC 85713671: Supplement left metacarpophalangeal joint with nonautologous tissue substitute, percutaneous approach

This classification denotes the group of activities that yields a surgical intervention or procedure to supplement left metacarpophalangeal joint with nonautologous tissue substitute, 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 0RUV3KZ

UNSPSC 85713671 Supplement left metacarpophalangeal joint with nonautologous tissue substitute, percutaneous approach is a Commodity code that the recent state and local procurement activity does not reflect. The code nominally describes a specific orthopedic surgical procedure, but the six recent opportunities posted between July and September 2026 target independent medical evaluation services, surgical benefit program administration, occupational medical surveillance, emergency and specialty healthcare for detained youth, pharmacy benefit management, and temporary health professional staffing—none of which align with the implantation of metacarpophalangeal joint prosthetics. The issuing bodies span city retirement offices (Phoenix), municipal human resources and benefits procurement (Long Beach), state transportation agencies (Washington State Department of Transportation), county juvenile justice systems (Harris County), county health systems (Santa Clara), and county benefits administration (Collier County). No vendor is pursuing or has won work explicitly under this code's scope.

The geographic spread of recent activity includes Arizona, California, Florida, Texas, and Washington, with no concentration in any single jurisdiction. The source contains no evidence of state or local procurement demand for the orthopedic procedure this code nominally describes. A business development professional evaluating pursuit under this code should treat it as dormant at the state and local level; the mismatch between the code's surgical-procedure scope and the actual medical-service and staffing demand visible in recent solicitations suggests either category misclassification in the source data or the absence of a state or local market for this specific implant procedure under current procurement mechanisms.