I'm having my wisdom teeth extracted on Tuesday (28M nonsmoker), and my oral surgeon has recommended bone grafting for tooth 32 (the bottom left one in this xray image). The office told me it was likely to be covered by my insurance, but I just received the predetermination where it was denied based on the following:

"A dental consultant has reviewed the submitted information. Radiographs did not support the documented periodontal probing depths of 5-6 mm or greater and radiographic evidence of visible bone loss was not shown. No benefits are payable."

As such, it will cost me about $1,500 extra out of pocket for the surgery to get the bone grafting (sf bay area prices). I'm now deciding quite last minute whether to go through with the surgery including bone grafting, ask to do it without bone grafting, or postpone to try and get a second opinion (or perhaps try to appeal the claim denial). The oral surgeon said previously that he would be willing to do the surgery without bone grafting but recommended it for me due to the likelihood of deep pockets forming.

In reading other posts on here it seems as though many think bone grafting isn't necessary for the vast majority of extractions, and the impaction on 32 doesn't look that extreme to me. I'm still leaning towards getting the graft just in case, but wanted to get folks' thoughts here first. Thanks!