Home / Conditions / Disc Inflam Pain Oth Dorsalgia

Disc Inflam Pain Oth Dorsalgia: when insurers say no, reviewers often say yes

In 35 published external-review decisions involving disc inflam pain oth dorsalgia, independent physician reviewers overturned the insurer’s denial 54.3% of the time.

Published decisions
35
2001–2026
Overturned
54.3%
19 denials reversed

Most-fought treatments for disc inflam pain oth dorsalgia

What insurers denied — and how those fights ended.
CategoryDecisionsOverturned
CNS Extracranial Autonomic16
62.5%

What the insurer actually argued

Denials fall into different categories, and they don’t succeed equally — so the reason on your letter changes how you should answer it.
Reason givenDecisionsOverturned
Medical Necessity
The plan said the care wasn’t medically necessary. The most common fight, and the most winnable.
24
45.8%
Experimental/Investigational
The plan called the treatment unproven. These turn on published evidence, so the appeal is a literature argument.
11
72.7%
Typical time to a decision
4 days
Most land between 3 and 10 days
Handled as urgent
74.3%
Expedited when a delay would cause harm
What the reviewers wrote
Excerpts from the independent reviewers’ published findings — the actual reasoning, quoted, not summarised.

Where the denial was overturned

Findings: The physician reviewer found that Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: A patient has requested authorization and coverage for lumbar epidural steroid injection. In this case, the patient has reported significant low back pain. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the patient’s lumbar spine shows impression of multilevel mild lumbar spine discogenic disease, most pronounced at L3-L4, interval decrease in left foraminal disc protrusion at L4-5 measuring 3 mm and contributing to moderate left lateral recess narrowing, and probable contact traversing the left L5 nerve root. Imaging also shows impression of multilevel mild foraminal stenosis and no significant lumbar spinal canal stenosis. The medical records document prior positive responses to transforaminal epidural steroid injections (TFESIs), which have significantly improved the patient’s lumbar radicular pain.
Medical Necessity · 2026 · IMR MN26-46863
Findings: The physician reviewer found that Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: A patient has requested authorization and coverage for total disc arthroplasty. Lumbar total disc replacement (arthroplasty) is a good surgical option for relatively young patients with discogenic low back pain, with or without radiculopathy, which is limited to one or two spinal levels, as approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Lumbar total disc replacement is more suitable for patients with discogenic lumbar pain without significant spinal canal stenosis, facet joint arthritis or spinal instability. Multiple studies have demonstrated the non-inferiority of lumbar disc replacements compared to fusion in terms of clinical outcomes and back pain relief, while maintaining normal vertebral disc mobility compared to lost motion associated with fusion.
Medical Necessity · 2026 · IMR MN26-46580

Where the denial was upheld

Worth reading too — these show what an appeal has to overcome.
Findings: The physician reviewer found that Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: A patient has requested authorization and coverage for the Intracept procedure for the back at L5-S1. A study found that patients treated with basivertebral nerve (BVN) ablation showed significant improvement in pain and visual analog scale (VAS), which was sustained out to five years. One study reported improved Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and pain scores with BVN at the three month endpoint. Another study similarly reported improved VAS and ODI in patients who underwent BVN ablation. In addition, the American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN) guidelines note that BVN ablation has received a Level A grade for high certainty that the net benefit is substantial in appropriately selected patients.
Experimental/Investigational · 2026 · IMR EI26-46855
Findings: The physician reviewer found that Nature of Statutory Criteria/Case Summary: A patient has requested authorization and coverage for percutaneous image-guided lumbar decompression at the L4-5. Per the medical records, patient has low back pain characterized by throbbing, dull/aching, cramping, and shooting with a sensation of pins and needles. A physical examination of the lumbar spine revealed a restricted range of motion in flexion and extension, limited lateral bending due to pain, bilateral paravertebral muscle tenderness, and positive lumbar facet loading. The patient has tried conservative treatments. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the lumbar spine revealed multilevel degenerative change of the lumbar spine, with mild-to-moderate spinal stenosis at L3–4 and up to moderate foraminal stenosis.
Experimental/Investigational · 2026 · IMR EI26-46563

Figures and quotations on this page come from 42,749 published decisions in the California DMHC Independent Medical Review dataset. These are California outcomes — every state runs an equivalent external review, but the rates here are California’s. Excerpts are quoted verbatim from the public record and describe this condition generally, not any individual case.

How to use this in your appeal

These outcomes come from California’s external review program — an independent physician panel whose decision binds the insurer. Every state has an equivalent, and internal appeals succeed even more often. If your care for disc inflam pain oth dorsalgia was denied, the published record says the denial is worth fighting.

SOURCE: CALIFORNIA DMHC INDEPENDENT MEDICAL REVIEW OUTCOMES (CHHS OPEN DATA) · DERIVED AGGREGATE STATISTICS ONLY · METHODOLOGY

Not legal or medical advice. Coverage Rights is a self-help tool that helps you prepare your own appeal. For advice about your specific situation, talk to a licensed attorney or your doctor.

Fighting a denial for disc inflam pain oth dorsalgia? 54.3% won.

Explain my denial — freeStart my appeal · $39