Evaluation of the cost effectiveness of vesico-amniotic shunting in the management of congenital lower urinary tract obstruction (based on data from the PLUTO Trial).

OBJECTIVE: To determine the cost-effectiveness of in-utero percutaneous Vesico Amniotic Shunt (VAS) in the management of fetal lower urinary tract obstruction (LUTO). DESIGN: Model based economic analysis using data from the randomised controlled arm of the PLUTO (percutaneous vesico-amniotic shunting for lower urinary tract obstruction) trial. SETTING: Fetal medicine departments in United Kingdom, Ireland and Netherlands. POPULATION OR SAMPLE: Pregnant women with a male, singleton fetus with LUTO. METHODS: Costs and outcomes were prospectively collected in the trial; three separate base case analyses were performed using the intention to treat (ITT), per protocol and uniform prior methods. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to explore data uncertainty. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Survival at 28 days, 1 year and disease free survival at 1 year. RESULTS: VAS was more expensive but appeared to result in higher rates of survival compared with conservative management in patients with LUTO. Using ITT analysis the incremental cost effectiveness ratios based on outcomes of survival at 28 days, 1 year, or 1 morbidity-free year on the VAS arm were £ 15,506, £ 15,545, and £ 43,932, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: VAS is a more expensive option compared to the conservative approach in the management of individuals with LUTO. Data from the RCT suggest that VAS improves neonatal survival but does not result in significant improvements in morbidity. Our analysis concludes that VAS is not likely to be cost effective in the management of these patients given the NICE (National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence) cost threshold of £ 20,000 per QALY.

A randomized trial of photoselective vaporization of the prostate using the 80-W potassium-titanyl-phosphate laser vs transurethral prostatectomy, with a 1-year follow-up.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the potassium-titanyl-phosphate Greenlight(TM) 80-W laser ablation system for photovaporization of the prostate (PVP; Laserscope, San Jose, CA, USA) with transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), as many technologies have been proposed as equivalent or superior to TURP without gaining widespread acceptance, due to lack of data from randomized trials. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In all, 120 patients were randomized to undergo either TURP or PVP after a full urological evaluation, which was repeated at 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery. Irrigation use, duration of catheterization (DOC), length of hospital stay (LOS), blood loss, cost and operative time were also assessed. RESULTS: Both groups showed a significant increase in mean (sd) maximum urinary flow rate from baseline (P < 0.05); in the TURP group from 8.9 (3.0) to 19.4 (8.7) mL/s (154%), and in the PVP group from 8.8 (2.5) to 18.6 (8.2) mL/s (136%). The International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) decreased from 25.4 (5.7) to 10.9 (9.4) in the TURP group (53%), and from 25.3 (5.9) to 8.9 (7.6) in the PVP group (61%). The trends were similar for the bother and Quality of Life scores. There was no difference in sexual function as measured by Baseline Sexual Function Questionnaires. The DOC was significantly less in the PVP than the TURP group (P < 0.001), with a mean (range) of 13 (0-24) h vs 44.7 (6-192) h. The situation was similar for LOS (P < 0.001), with a mean (range) of 1.09 (1-2) and 3.6 (3-9) days in the PVP and TURP groups, respectively. Adverse events and complications were less frequent in the PVP group. Costs were also 22% less in the PVP group. CONCLUSIONS: This trial shows that PVP is an effective technique when compared to TURP, producing equivalent improvements in flow rates and IPSS with the advantages of markedly reduced LOS, DOC and adverse events. A long-term follow-up is being undertaken to ensure durability of these results.

Holmium laser enucleation versus open prostatectomy for benign prostatic hyperplasia: an inpatient cost analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the cost of open transvesical prostatectomy (OP) with that of holmium laser enucleation (HoLEP) in the treatment of bladder outlet obstruction (BOO) attributed to benign prostatic hyperplasia. METHODS: From February to May 2004, 63 consecutive patients with symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia in a large prostate (70 to 220 g) and documented BOO were randomized to surgical treatment with OP (29 in group 1) or HoLEP (34 in group 2). All costs associated with the procedures during the hospital stay were recorded prospectively, and a cost-effectiveness analysis of the critical perioperative (ie, intraoperative and postoperative to hospital discharge) data was performed. RESULTS: The cost analysis showed a mean perioperative cost of 2868.9 euros (3556.3 dollars) for group 1 and 2356.5 euros (2919.4 dollars) for group 2. A direct comparison analysis showed that the most significant cost factors were the operative time (average 16.1% and 25.1% to the cost of OP and HoLEP, respectively), operating room surgical setup/disposables, including laser fiber and resectoscope loop in group 2 (average 13.3% and 29.3% to the cost of OP and HoLEP, respectively), and length of postoperative hospital stay (average 53.3% and 32.0% to the cost of OP and HoLEP, respectively). Overall, the hospitalization cost of HoLEP was 9.6% less than that for OP. CONCLUSIONS: Our data have demonstrated that HoLEP is associated with a significant hospital net cost savings compared with OP in patients undergoing surgery for symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia in large glands.