Via Disc

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

bedrock

Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2005
Messages
7,222
Reaction score
4,757
I’ve been hit with several types of unsolicited marketing for Via Disc this week.

I’m not necessarily looking to do them.

However I’m wondering how strong is the evidence and relative risk of the procedure?

Members don't see this ad.
 
Risk is relatively low - biggest risk of course is diskitis. There are ways to mitigate this.

Their data isn’t the strongest. I can’t recall details completely but had a low ‘n’ and there was pretty significant improvement in pain score in the placebo group as well
 
it may need to be done at a hospital for the cost to work out. I think it’s Medicare only because they’re using clinical trial codes
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Members don't see this ad :)
Placebo arm was saline
Both arms improved



Fda said it was a drug so they are now running a acellular study with just NP
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
i was going to post about this. Intradiscal saline had 50% improvement... why do i feel like none of this "trials" results are truly reproducible or accurate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
1673451867037.png


Doctor fee = 0.
Only makes sense if physicians were either wRVU compensated OR they collected facility fee.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Wow. The audacity of a literal zero professional fee!

Really tired of seeing a nice facility fee and then only table scraps for the expertise and risk of the physician performing the procedure.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
maybe they can pay nurses to do the procedure?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: 1 user
Members don't see this ad :)
i was going to post about this. Intradiscal saline had 50% improvement... why do i feel like none of this "trials" results are truly reproducible or accurate.

I thought it was weird that they did a NS injection as a control. Isn't the point of this procedure to add hydration/volume to a fibrotic and underhydrated disc? So why have a control arm that essentially does that?

Clearly intradiscal saline should not have a 50% improvement, but they aren't helping themselves by adding a control arm that's just a less efficacious treatment arm.

Possibly a sham injection? IDK.. the study heaps scepticism on itself for having such a high responder rate in the control arm for sure.
 
If you were frisky and had a good admin you could negotiate an RVU. Take the profit and divide it in half/convert that to units. I’m not frisky enough for that conversation of late.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Rvu should be 4.5. That’s what I’d make it
 
It's a cash procedure. One of the authors is one of my partners.
 
Well...I've never sent someone over to him nor have I looked to incorporate it into my practice. I've spoken to him about it loosely about 3 yrs ago. Unconvinced. Want nothing to do with it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
It's a cash procedure. One of the authors is one of my partners.
Interesting
1. What’s a ballpark rate for it?
2. If it’s cash only why use ViaDisc and not other regenerative med injectates?
 
Not sure on cost. To the other Q, if you're a believer in something you do it I guess.

Some people believe Medtronic and Nevro make effective stimulators...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Federal facility and pure salary so it's all monopoly money. I saw that it's a category III CPT code which explains why there is no professional fee. I wonder if/when they will change categories and how that will affect reimbursement.

I thought you left the VA for private practice?
 
Rep told me that the kit alone is like 5k(obviously can be negotiated) and most cash payments are around 8k.

The rule for engagement rings and cash-price medical procedures is 3 months' salary. Now, you've got a friend in the diamond business.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Top