Minimally Invasive Treatment for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: Economic Evaluation from a Standardized Hospital Case Costing System

PurposeMinimally invasive alternatives to transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) such as prostate arterial embolization (PAE) and photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) are being explored as adjuncts in the care of patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia. However, there are conflicting reports of the costs of these procedures. The purpose of this study was to compare the direct and indirect hospital costs of TURP, PAE and PVP.Materials and MethodsA chart review was performed in patients who underwent TURP, PVP and PAE from April 2015 to March 2017. All hospital costs were collected in accordance with the Ontario Case Costing Initiative, a standardized medical case costing system. Costs were characterized as direct or indirect and fixed or variable. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was conducted to study cost uncertainty.ResultsDuring the study period, a total of 209 men underwent TURP, 28 PVP and 21 PAE. Mean age (years) was as follows: TURP 71.43; PVP 73.66; PAE 70.77 (p=0.366). Mean length of stay (days) was as follows: TURP 1.63; PVP 1.55; PAE 1 (p=0.076). Total costs of the PAE group ($3829, SD $1582) were less than both PVP ($5719, SD $1515) and TURP groups ($5034, SD $1997, p<0.001). There was no significant difference in direct costs between the groups. Monte Carlo simulation demonstrated that PAE was the least costly alternative majority of the time.ConclusionsThe total hospital costs of PAE at our institution are significantly lower than those of PVP and TURP.