Utilization Trends of Transnasal Endoscopic Sphenopalatine Artery Ligation (TESPAL) in the Medicare Population
ABSTRACT Objectives Transnasal endoscopic sphenopalatine artery ligation (TESPAL) has been proposed as a first‐line therapy for intractable epistaxis before utilizing posterior nasal packing and embolization. A specific procedure code for TESPAL was newly introduced in 2018, adding to two prior code...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2025-04-01
|
| Series: | Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1002/lio2.70111 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | ABSTRACT Objectives Transnasal endoscopic sphenopalatine artery ligation (TESPAL) has been proposed as a first‐line therapy for intractable epistaxis before utilizing posterior nasal packing and embolization. A specific procedure code for TESPAL was newly introduced in 2018, adding to two prior codes for procedural control of epistaxis. This study compares all‐time utilization of the TESPAL CPT code in Medicare beneficiaries with alternative procedural codes for epistaxis management. Methods The publicly available data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services in the 2013–2022 period was analyzed for the reporting of TESPAL (31241), transcatheter permanent occlusion or embolization of noncentral nervous system, head, or neck (61626), and endoscopic control of epistaxis (31238) codes. Welch two sample t‐test and linear regression were used to characterize CPT code utilization. Results From 2018 to 2022, TESPAL CPT code reporting averaged 378 instances annually, with a stable utilization trend (p = 0.432). CPT codes 61626 and 31238 averaged 1429 and 3779 instances annually, respectively. CPT 31238 showed a significant decline (p < 0.001), and CPT 61626 showed a stable trend (p = 0.082). There was a significant decline in CPT code 31238 use after 2018 (p < 0.01). CPT 61626 showed a significant increase in usage post‐2018 (t = 2.90, p = 0.044). Conclusion After an initial increase in 2019, TESPAL reporting flattened, while CPT 61626 (which includes all embolization in head and neck vessels) significantly increased post‐2018. As recent studies show significant advantages of TESPAL over embolization, these findings warrant further attention and study. Level of Evidence 3. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2378-8038 |