Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Holmium laser prostatectomy in a tertiary Italian center: A prospective cost analysis in comparison with bipolar TURP and open prostatectomy.
Arch Ital Urol Androl. 2020 Jun 23; 92(2)AI

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To assess the economic impact of Holmium laser enucleation of prostate (HoLEP) in comparison with transurethral resection of prostate (TURP) and open prostatectomy (OP).

METHODS

Between January 2017 and January 2018, we prospectively enrolled 151 men who underwent HoLEP, TURP or OP at tertiary Italian center, due to bladder outflow obstruction symptoms. Patients with prostate volume ≤ 70 cc and those with prostate volume > 70 cc were scheduled for TURP or HoLEP and OP or HoLEP, respectively. Intraoperative and early post-operative functional outcomes were recorded up to 6 months follow up. Cost analysis was carried out considering direct costs (operating room [OR] utilization costs, nurse, surgeons and anesthesiologists' costs, OR disposable products costs and OR products sterilization costs), indirect costs (hospital stay costs and diagnostics costs) and global costs as sum of both direct and indirect plus general costs related to hospitalization. Cost analysis was performed comparing patients referred to TURP and HoLEP with prostate volume ≤ 70 cc and men underwent OP and HoLEP with prostate volume > 70 cc respectively.

RESULTS

Overall, 53 (35.1%), 51 (33.7%) and 47 (31.1%) were scheduled to HoLEP, TURP and OP, respectively. Both TURP, HoLEP and OP proved to effectively improve urinary symptoms related to BPE. Considering patients with prostate volume ≤ 70 cc, median global cost of HoLEP was similar to median global cost of TURP (2151.69 € vs. 2185.61 €, respectively; p = 0.61). Considering patients with prostate volume > 70 cc, median global cost of HoLEP was found to be significantly lower than median global cost of OP (2174.15 € vs. 4064.97 €, respectively; p ≤ 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Global costs of HoLEP are comparable to those of TURP, offering a cost saving of only 11.4 € in favor of HoLEP. Conversely, HoLEP proved to be a strong competitor of OP because of significant global cost sparing amounting to 1890.82 € in favor of HoLEP.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Department of Urology, University of Bologna; Department of Experimental, Diagnostic and Specialty Medicine (DIMES), Cardio-Nephro-Thoracic Sciences Doctorate, University of Bologna, Bologna. rschiavina@yahoo.it.No affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Journal Article

Language

eng

PubMed ID

32597105

Citation

Schiavina, Riccardo, et al. "Holmium Laser Prostatectomy in a Tertiary Italian Center: a Prospective Cost Analysis in Comparison With Bipolar TURP and Open Prostatectomy." Archivio Italiano Di Urologia, Andrologia : Organo Ufficiale [di] Societa Italiana Di Ecografia Urologica E Nefrologica, vol. 92, no. 2, 2020.
Schiavina R, Bianchi L, Giampaoli M, et al. Holmium laser prostatectomy in a tertiary Italian center: A prospective cost analysis in comparison with bipolar TURP and open prostatectomy. Arch Ital Urol Androl. 2020;92(2).
Schiavina, R., Bianchi, L., Giampaoli, M., Borghesi, M., Dababneh, H., Chessa, F., Pultrone, C., Angiolini, A., Barbaresi, U., Cevenini, M., Manferrari, F., Bertaccini, A., Porreca, A., & Brunocilla, E. (2020). Holmium laser prostatectomy in a tertiary Italian center: A prospective cost analysis in comparison with bipolar TURP and open prostatectomy. Archivio Italiano Di Urologia, Andrologia : Organo Ufficiale [di] Societa Italiana Di Ecografia Urologica E Nefrologica, 92(2). https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2020.2.82
Schiavina R, et al. Holmium Laser Prostatectomy in a Tertiary Italian Center: a Prospective Cost Analysis in Comparison With Bipolar TURP and Open Prostatectomy. Arch Ital Urol Androl. 2020 Jun 23;92(2) PubMed PMID: 32597105.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Holmium laser prostatectomy in a tertiary Italian center: A prospective cost analysis in comparison with bipolar TURP and open prostatectomy. AU - Schiavina,Riccardo, AU - Bianchi,Lorenzo, AU - Giampaoli,Marco, AU - Borghesi,Marco, AU - Dababneh,Hussam, AU - Chessa,Francesco, AU - Pultrone,Cristian, AU - Angiolini,Andrea, AU - Barbaresi,Umberto, AU - Cevenini,Matteo, AU - Manferrari,Fabio, AU - Bertaccini,Alessandro, AU - Porreca,Angelo, AU - Brunocilla,Eugenio, Y1 - 2020/06/23/ PY - 2019/02/17/received PY - 2019/04/02/accepted PY - 2020/6/30/entrez JF - Archivio italiano di urologia, andrologia : organo ufficiale [di] Societa italiana di ecografia urologica e nefrologica JO - Arch Ital Urol Androl VL - 92 IS - 2 N2 - OBJECTIVE: To assess the economic impact of Holmium laser enucleation of prostate (HoLEP) in comparison with transurethral resection of prostate (TURP) and open prostatectomy (OP). METHODS: Between January 2017 and January 2018, we prospectively enrolled 151 men who underwent HoLEP, TURP or OP at tertiary Italian center, due to bladder outflow obstruction symptoms. Patients with prostate volume ≤ 70 cc and those with prostate volume > 70 cc were scheduled for TURP or HoLEP and OP or HoLEP, respectively. Intraoperative and early post-operative functional outcomes were recorded up to 6 months follow up. Cost analysis was carried out considering direct costs (operating room [OR] utilization costs, nurse, surgeons and anesthesiologists' costs, OR disposable products costs and OR products sterilization costs), indirect costs (hospital stay costs and diagnostics costs) and global costs as sum of both direct and indirect plus general costs related to hospitalization. Cost analysis was performed comparing patients referred to TURP and HoLEP with prostate volume ≤ 70 cc and men underwent OP and HoLEP with prostate volume > 70 cc respectively. RESULTS: Overall, 53 (35.1%), 51 (33.7%) and 47 (31.1%) were scheduled to HoLEP, TURP and OP, respectively. Both TURP, HoLEP and OP proved to effectively improve urinary symptoms related to BPE. Considering patients with prostate volume ≤ 70 cc, median global cost of HoLEP was similar to median global cost of TURP (2151.69 € vs. 2185.61 €, respectively; p = 0.61). Considering patients with prostate volume > 70 cc, median global cost of HoLEP was found to be significantly lower than median global cost of OP (2174.15 € vs. 4064.97 €, respectively; p ≤ 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Global costs of HoLEP are comparable to those of TURP, offering a cost saving of only 11.4 € in favor of HoLEP. Conversely, HoLEP proved to be a strong competitor of OP because of significant global cost sparing amounting to 1890.82 € in favor of HoLEP. SN - 2282-4197 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/32597105/Holmium_laser_prostatectomy_in_a_tertiary_Italian_center:_A_prospective_cost_analysis_in_comparison_with_bipolar_TURP_and_open_prostatectomy L2 - https://doi.org/10.4081/aiua.2020.2.82 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -
Try the Free App:
Prime PubMed app for iOS iPhone iPad
Prime PubMed app for Android
Prime PubMed is provided
free to individuals by:
Unbound Medicine.