NEVVI Medicare utilization intelligence
+ Build a code basket
Market snapshot

Nationwide CY2024

Medicare Part B FFS · CY2024 · as published by CMS
92974 Insertion of radiation delivery device into heart artery CPT · Cardiovascular procedure
Classification Procedure Cardiovascular Percutaneous Coronary Artery Angioplasty and Stenting (CMS RBCS)
First observed 2013 — start of our 12-year window; the code predates it
National scale 90 services ▼ 56.3% YoY · 79 beneficiaries (CY2024, Medicare FFS)
Medicare paid $12K · $134.74 avg / service, national
CMS descriptor · RBCS classification · Medicare Part B physician/supplier claims, 12-year window
Billing groups

5

Named groups billing this code
Named-group FFS services

76

Attributable volume · fee-for-service
FFS of Medicare

49%

Payer-mix frame
Services · year over year
Services YoY

-56.3%

FFS enrollment -2.2%
Volume, not care. A shrinking fee-for-service denominator is not a shrinking market.
Estimated all-Medicare volume estimate
FFS + estimated MA

~138 services

76 observed fee-for-service (55%) · ~62 estimated Medicare Advantage.

Scaled from the observed floor by each state’s fee-for-service share (FFS share as of 2024) — scaled estimate — assumes MA utilization mirrors FFS; not an observation. How we scale
Top states — 92974 (CY2024)

Disclosed Medicare fee-for-service services by billing state; open a bar for that state's ranked market.

Billed → allowed → paid
Named-group submitted charges
$48K
Named-group allowed amount
$12K
Named-group Medicare payments
$10K
Avg charge / svc
$634
Avg allowed / svc
$164
Avg payment / svc
$131
Totals are named-group (attributable) sums. Allowed is Medicare’s fee-schedule recognized price — what CMS recognizes, before the 80% Medicare pays.
Average charge per group
$492 5 groups · avg submitted charge / service $693
Market analyticsPlatform Methods →

Search a single state to see that market's full analytics — the free tier previews every panel, gated.

Or just look at it: nuclear heart imaging (78452) in Arizona is open as a live example — the full paid view, real data.

View the live example →
Unlock the Platform — the full read, every number below, code baskets, and export. Looking is free; the depth is paid. Notify me at launch →
Refine: group size any 5+ 25+ 100+ independent only
Filter results:

Email me this CSV

Data year: CY2024 CY2023 CY2022 locked column CY2021 locked column CY2020 locked column
Physician groups ranked by 92974 services, highest first, CY2024
# Physician group activate to sort City activate to sort St activate to sort Specialty activate to sort Providers activate to sort 92974 svcs sorted descending — activate to reverse Submitted charges activate to sort Avg charge activate to sort Medicare $ locked column Share* activate to sort Phone
1 MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL PHYSICIANS ORGANIZATION INC BOSTON MA DIAGNOSTIC RADIOLOGY 3532 18 $12,474 $693 premium 54.5% (617) 724-0287
2 ICAHN SCHOOL OF MEDICINE AT MOUNT SINAI NEW YORK NY PHYSICIAN ASSISTANT 2818 16 $11,040 $690 premium 53.3% (212) 241-4812
3 BRIGHAM AND WOMENS PHYSICIANS ORGANIZATION INC BOSTON MA PHYSICIAN ASSISTANT 2942 15 $10,260 $684 premium 45.5% (617) 732-5500
4 THE ASSOCIATION OF UNIVERSITY PHYSICIANS SEATTLE WA PHYSICIAN ASSISTANT 3612 14 $6,895 $492 premium 100.0% (206) 364-0500
5 SCRIPPS HEALTH LA JOLLA CA PHYSICIAN ASSISTANT 1431 13 $7,480 $575 premium 100.0% (858) 455-9100

*Share of the state's disclosed Medicare-FFS services for the primary code, counted once per clinician. "St" is the state the volume was billed from: a group appears in each state where its clinicians bill Medicare, with that state's volume and share ("City" is the group's registered location). Group figures sum clinicians affiliated with exactly one group; clinicians in several groups are listed in each group's drill-down but not volume-attributed to any single group, so shares reflect attributable volume. See Methods.

Comparing against an all-payer estimate?

These are exact counts from Medicare fee-for-service claims — roughly a third to half of most procedure markets, depending on payer mix. Modeled all-payer databases project the remainder statistically; we publish the audited floor and label it as such. Same market, different denominator. How the numbers reconcile →