UNSPSC 85871802: Ultrasonography of bilateral internal carotid arteries, intravascular

This classification denotes the group of activities that yields a imaging intervention or procedure to ultrasonography of bilateral internal carotid arteries, intravascularultrasonography of bilateral internal carotid arteries, intravascular. This 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 B348ZZ3

UNSPSC 85871802 Ultrasonography of bilateral internal carotid arteries, intravascular is a Commodity code that state and local procurement records show does not align with recent contract opportunities actually being solicited. The code's nominal scope — a specific diagnostic imaging procedure — does not match the healthcare delivery and staffing work appearing under this code in recent state and local postings. The opportunities present instead encompass enterprise imaging systems, special education contracted services, and temporary health professional staffing across ancillary clinical roles, none of which constitute ultrasonography services or correspond meaningfully to the code's stated commodity.

The most recent opportunities tagged under this code originate from San Mateo County (California), Birdville Independent School District (Texas), and the County of Santa Clara Health System (California). San Mateo Medical Center posted an RFP for Diagnostic Imaging PACS implementation due October 21, 2026, targeting enterprise-grade picture archiving and communication system software with EPIC integration supporting radiology, cardiology, and dental imaging across 65,000 annual radiology studies. The County of Santa Clara Health System posted a qualification vehicle due October 7, 2026, for temporary staffing in ancillary health professional categories including diagnostic imaging and radiology, with no guaranteed volume and vendor pool maintenance for up to five years. These opportunities reflect no coherent procurement activity under the code's actual commodity definition, suggesting either misclassification at the issuing-body level or a systematic tagging error in the data source. Pursuit of this code for business development purposes is not supported by evidence of matching state and local demand.