Cost-effectiveness analysis of microwave ablation versus robot-assisted partial nephrectomy for patients with small renal masses in Australia

Objectives: Microwave ablation (MWA) has gained attention as a minimally invasive and safe alternative to surgical intervention for patients with small renal masses; however, its cost-effectiveness in Australia remains unclear. This study conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis to evaluate the relative clinical and economic merits of MWA compared to robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy (RA-PN) in the treatment of small renal masses. Methods: A Markov state-transition model was constructed to simulate the progression of Australian patients with small renal masses treated with MWA versus RA-PN over a 10-year horizon. Transition probabilities and utility data were sourced from comprehensive literature reviews, and cost data were estimated from the Australian health system perspective. Life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and lifetime costs were estimated. Modelled uncertainty was assessed using both deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. A willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $50,000 per QALY was adopted. All costs are expressed in 2022 Australian dollars and discounted at 3% annually. To assess the broader applicability of our findings, a validated cost-adaptation method was employed to extend the analysis to 8 other high-income countries. Results: Both the base case and cost-adaptation analyses revealed that MWA dominated RA-PN, producing both lower costs and greater effectiveness over 10 years. The cost-effectiveness outcome was robust across all model parameters. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses confirmed that MWA was dominant in 98.3% of simulations at the designated WTP threshold, underscoring the reliability of the model under varying assumptions. Conclusion: For patients with small renal masses in Australia and comparable healthcare settings, MWA is the preferred strategy to maximize health benefits per dollar, making it a highly cost-effective alternative to RA-PN. (c) 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/)