Urology · 2006
Holmium laser enucleation versus open prostatectomy for benign prostatic hyperplasia: an inpatient cost analysis.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Salonia Andrea, Suardi Nazareno, Naspro Richard, Mazzoccoli Bruno, Zanni Giuseppe, Gallina Andrea, Bua Lina, Scattoni Vincenzo, Rigatti Patrizio, Montorsi Francesco
Аннотация
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.
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.