Cost-effectiveness of Medical Versus Surgical Therapy for BPH

AbstractPurpose of ReviewBenign prostatic enlargement and obstruction may result in lower urinary tract symptom (LUTS) and have a negative impact on a patient ’s quality of life. The purpose of this review is to analyze different management options, specifically evaluating the cost-effectiveness of medical versus surgical therapy for BPH.Recent FindingsWe performed a detailed review comparing various studies regarding the cost-effectiveness of different management options that were conducted in the last 5  years. When comparing monotherapy with combination therapy in medical treatments, the latter was found to be more cost-effective. Branded combined medical therapies were found to be much more expensive than generic medical therapies but demonstrated the same therapeutic outcome. When looking at op erative options, specifically among the transurethral surgeries, there are more invasive options, including mono/bipolar transurethral resection of prostate (TURP) and laser vaporization and there are less invasive modalities (MIST) such as Urolift, Rezūm, transurethral microwave thermotherapy (TUM T), and transurethral needle ablation (TUNA). The findings demonstrated the cost of the more invasive options depended on whether the procedure was conducted as an inpatient or outpatient, with inpatient surgeries being the more expensive. In this context, GreenLight PVP, being performed as an outpa tient procedure, was less expensive than TURP. Both of them provided the best relief...
Source: Current Bladder Dysfunction Reports - Category: Urology & Nephrology Source Type: research