Retrograde intrarenal surgery cost-effective option for managing 1-2 cm renal stones
Management of renal stones has been under research. For 1-2cm renal stones, retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) is most cost-effective, finds a study.
The research is published in the Urology Journal.
Kevin M. Wymer and colleagues from the Department of Urology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, conducted the recent study to perform a cost-effectiveness evaluation comparing the management options for mid-size (1-2cm) renal stones including percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL), retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS), and shockwave lithotripsy (SWL).
The authors created a Markov model to compare cost-effectiveness of percutaneous nephrolithotomy, mini- percutaneous nephrolithotomy, retrograde intrarenal surgery, and shockwave lithotripsy for 1-2cm lower pole (index patient 1) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy, retrograde intrarenal surgery, and shockwave lithotripsy for 1-2 cm non–lower pole (index patient 2) renal stones.
A literature review provided stone free, complication, retreatment, secondary procedure rates, and quality adjusted life years (QALYs). Medicare costs were used. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was compared with a willingness-to-pay(WTP) threshold. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.
The study results showed that at 3 years, costs for index patient 1 were $10,290(PCNL), $10,109(mini-PCNL), $5,930(RIRS), and $10,916(SWL). Mini- percutaneous nephrolithotomy resulted in the highest QALYs(2.953) followed by percutaneous nephrolithotomy (2.951), retrograde intrarenal surgery (2.946), and shockwave lithotripsy(2.943).
This translated to retrograde intrarenal surgery being most cost-effective followed by mini- percutaneous nephrolithotomy (ICER $624,075/QALY) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (ICER $946,464/QALY). Shockwave lithotripsy was dominated with higher costs and lower effectiveness.
For index patient 2, retrograde intrarenal surgery dominated both percutaneous nephrolithotomy and shockwave lithotripsy. For index patient 1: mini- percutaneous nephrolithotomy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy became cost effective if cost ≤$5,940 and ≤$5,390, respectively.
Shockwave lithotripsy became cost-effective with SFR ≥75% or cost ≤$1,236. On probabilistic sensitivity analysis, the most cost-effective strategy was retrograde intrarenal surgery in 97%, mini- percutaneous nephrolithotomy in 2%, percutaneous nephrolithotomy in 1%, and shockwave lithotripsy in 0% of simulations.
As a result, it was concluded that for 1-2cm renal stones, retrograde intrarenal surgery is most cost-effective. However, mini and standard percutaneous nephrolithotomy could become cost-effective at lower costs, particularly for lower pole stones.
For further reference, log in to:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urology.2021.06.030
Disclaimer: This website is primarily for healthcare professionals. The content here does not replace medical advice and should not be used as medical, diagnostic, endorsement, treatment, or prescription advice. Medical science evolves rapidly, and we strive to keep our information current. If you find any discrepancies, please contact us at corrections@medicaldialogues.in. Read our Correction Policy here. Nothing here should be used as a substitute for medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment. We do not endorse any healthcare advice that contradicts a physician's guidance. Use of this site is subject to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and Advertisement Policy. For more details, read our Full Disclaimer here.
NOTE: Join us in combating medical misinformation. If you encounter a questionable health, medical, or medical education claim, email us at factcheck@medicaldialogues.in for evaluation.