Compare

Two terms, side by side

Pick any two terms to see definitions, context, pitfalls, and sources in parallel.

Reimbursement

Proprietary Laboratory Analyses Codes(PLA)

In one line

AMA CPT code subset that uniquely identifies a single proprietary clinical lab test (LDT or IVD) for pricing and tracking.

Definition

Proprietary Laboratory Analyses (PLA) codes are a subset of CPT Category I codes, introduced by the AMA in 2018, that assign a unique CPT code to a single proprietary clinical laboratory or molecular diagnostic test. Unlike generic molecular CPT codes (the 81xxx 'stack codes'), PLA codes give CMS, MACs, and commercial payers a clean way to set test-specific pricing on the Clinical Laboratory Fee Schedule (CLFS). PLA applications are reviewed quarterly by the AMA CPT Editorial Panel.

Why it matters

PLA codes are the dominant route for branded molecular diagnostics (oncology liquid biopsy, MRD assays, transplant rejection assays) to achieve test-specific reimbursement. Filing strategy and crosswalk positioning materially affect realized price.

Common pitfalls

•Filing for PLA without a defensible crosswalk strategy — gapfill is unpredictable.
•Confusing PLA code issuance with payer coverage; coverage is a separate MAC/commercial payer decision.

Sources

AMA — PLA Codes · AMA
CMS — Clinical Laboratory Fee Schedule · CMS
AMA CPT Resources · AMA

Open full page

Select term B to compare.

Why compare MedTech terms side by side?

MedTech terminology is full of pairs that look interchangeable but carry very different regulatory, clinical, and commercial consequences. Picking the wrong framework, pathway, or standard early in a project can add months to a submission, invalidate clinical evidence, or trigger an audit finding. Side-by-side comparison is the fastest way to surface those differences before they become costly mistakes.

Each comparison on this page pulls from the same vendor-neutral, sourced definitions used throughout the MedTech Terms glossary. You see the one-line summary, the formal definition, why it matters in practice, common pitfalls, and the primary sources (FDA guidance, EU MDR/IVDR articles, ISO/IEC standards, MDCG documents, IMDRF principles) that back each entry. That makes the comparison defensible in regulatory strategy memos, design reviews, and submission narratives.

Common comparison patterns

Regulatory pathway choice - 510(k) vs PMA, 510(k) vs De Novo, Abbreviated vs Special 510(k).
Quality systems - QSR vs ISO 13485, QMSR vs QSR.
Software classification - SaMD vs SiMD, Locked vs adaptive AI.
EU frameworks - MDR vs IVDR, CE Mark vs UKCA.
Cybersecurity artifacts - SPDX vs CycloneDX SBOM, CVE vs CVSS.
Post-market actions - Recall vs field action, Removal vs correction.

How to use this tool

Pick term A and term B from the dropdowns, or click a preset above. The URL updates with both slugs so you can bookmark or share the exact comparison with a colleague, a notified body reviewer, or your regulatory consultant. Click Open full page on either side for the complete entry, including FAQs, related terms, and the full citation list. If you are not sure which term to start with, browse the Categories view or the A-Z index.

MedTech Terms is a vendor-neutral community resource sponsored by Blue Goat Cyber. Definitions are written for educational use and are not legal or regulatory advice.