UNSPSC 85873252: Fluoroscopy of right pelvic (iliac) veins using other contrast, guidance

This classification denotes the group of activities that yields a imaging intervention or procedure to fluoroscopy of right pelvic (iliac) veins using other contrast, guidancefluoroscopy of right pelvic (iliac) veins using other contrast, guidance. 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 B51FYZA

UNSPSC 85873252 Fluoroscopy of right pelvic (iliac) veins using other contrast, guidance is a Commodity code with little recent state and local procurement activity aligned to its nominal scope. The three most recent opportunities tagged to this code show a marked mismatch: San Mateo Medical Center posted an RFP for enterprise diagnostic imaging PACS (Picture Archiving and Communication System) software and implementation with a response date of October 21, 2026; Birdville Independent School District in northeast Tarrant County, Texas issued a competitive sealed proposal for special education contracted services including speech-language therapy, occupational therapy, and other ancillary clinical specialists with a response date of October 21, 2026; and Santa Clara County Health System established a qualification vehicle for temporary health professional staffing across multiple ancillary clinical categories including diagnostic imaging/radiology services, with submissions due October 7, 2026. The code nominally describes a specific fluoroscopy procedure using contrast media, yet the recent opportunities span IT infrastructure, school-based special services, and temporary clinical staffing — none of which represent direct fluoroscopy procedure purchases or imaging studies.

The issuing bodies are primarily county and regional health systems (San Mateo and Santa Clara counties in California) and an independent school district (Texas), suggesting the code may be incidentally applied to health-system procurement activity that does not correspond to its procedural specificity. No repeat buyers appear across recent opportunities. Geographic activity centers on California and Texas, with no additional states represented in the current opportunity set. The mismatch between the code's intended scope and actual recent solicitations suggests this code may be misapplied in state and local taxonomies or may see minimal direct procurement under its true definition.