PMID- 14616453
OWN - NLM
STAT- MEDLINE
DCOM- 20031223
LR  - 20190906
IS  - 1464-4096 (Print)
IS  - 1464-4096 (Linking)
VI  - 92
IP  - 7
DP  - 2003 Nov
TI  - Transurethral resection vs microwave thermotherapy of the prostate: a 
      cost-consequences analysis.
PG  - 713-8
AB  - OBJECTIVE: To compare the costs and outcome of high-energy transurethral 
      microwave thermotherapy of the prostate (HE-TUMT) with transurethral resection of 
      the prostate (TURP), as the former is considered to be the best minimally 
      invasive method for managing lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) suggestive of 
      benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between January 1996 
      and March 1997, 144 patients were randomized to treatment with HE-TUMT (78) using 
      the Prostatron device and Prostasoft 2.5 software (EDAP Technomed, Lyon, France), 
      or TURP (66). At baseline and during the annual follow-up, patients were 
      evaluated by the International Prostate Symptom Score and uroflowmetry (maximum 
      flow rate and postvoid residual volume). Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were used 
      to calculate the cumulative risk of re-treatment. A cost-consequences analysis 
      was performed based on the prospective measurement of healthcare use, with costs 
      expressed as Netherland guilders (NLG). RESULTS: During a 3-year follow-up 
      period, the mean (95% confidence interval) risk of re-treatment was 22.9 
      (12.5-33.2)% and 13.2 (4.5-21.9)% for HE-TUMT and TURP, respectively (P = 0.215). 
      The mean direct cost of treatment was 3450 (3444-3456) and 6560 (5992-7128) NLG 
      for HE-TUMT and TURP, respectively. The mean total (including re-treatments), 
      discounted (4%) 3-year cost for the HE-TUMT and TURP group was 5300 (4692-5908) 
      and 7800 (7118-8482) NLG, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this prospective 
      randomized trial, HE-TUMT and TURP had a comparable 3-year risk of re-treatment. 
      Healthcare expenditure on HE-TUMT, mainly because it is an outpatient treatment, 
      was significantly lower than for TURP.
FAU - De La Rosette, J J M C H
AU  - De La Rosette JJ
AD  - Department of Urology, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. 
      J.J.delaRosette@amc.uva.nl
FAU - Floratos, D L
AU  - Floratos DL
FAU - Severens, J L
AU  - Severens JL
FAU - Kiemeney, L A L M
AU  - Kiemeney LA
FAU - Debruyne, F M J
AU  - Debruyne FM
FAU - Pilar Laguna, M
AU  - Pilar Laguna M
LA  - eng
PT  - Clinical Trial
PT  - Comparative Study
PT  - Journal Article
PT  - Randomized Controlled Trial
PL  - England
TA  - BJU Int
JT  - BJU international
JID - 100886721
SB  - IM
CIN - BJU Int. 2004 May;93(7):1118-9. PMID: 15142185
MH  - Aged
MH  - Ambulatory Care/economics
MH  - Cost-Benefit Analysis
MH  - Day Care, Medical/economics
MH  - Follow-Up Studies
MH  - Health Resources/economics
MH  - Humans
MH  - Hyperthermia, Induced/*economics/methods
MH  - Male
MH  - Microwaves/*therapeutic use
MH  - Netherlands
MH  - Prospective Studies
MH  - Prostatic Hyperplasia/economics/surgery/*therapy
MH  - Retreatment
MH  - Risk Factors
MH  - Survival Analysis
MH  - Transurethral Resection of Prostate/*economics/statistics & numerical data
MH  - Urologic Diseases/economics/therapy
EDAT- 2003/11/18 05:00
MHDA- 2003/12/24 05:00
CRDT- 2003/11/18 05:00
PHST- 2003/11/18 05:00 [pubmed]
PHST- 2003/12/24 05:00 [medline]
PHST- 2003/11/18 05:00 [entrez]
AID - 4470 [pii]
AID - 10.1046/j.1464-410x.2003.04470.x [doi]
PST - ppublish
SO  - BJU Int. 2003 Nov;92(7):713-8. doi: 10.1046/j.1464-410x.2003.04470.x.