Does Early Retrograde Intrarenal Surgery Improve the Cost-Effectiveness of Renal Stone Management?
1
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of treatment with retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) versus repeated shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) in patients with renal calculi. Materials and Methods: The non-retreatment rates (NRRs) and their respective real-world costs for RIRS and SWL were derived through retrospective analysis of health insurance claims data from 2015 to 2017. Decision tree modeling was performed to demonstrate the cost-effectiveness of RIRS. Furthermore, sensitivity analysis was performed to examine the robustness of the results. Results: Analysis of the obtained data showed that NRRs of single SWL ranged from 46% to 56%, whereas NRRs of single RIRS ranged from 75% to 93%. Introducing RIRS early in the treatment sequence was observed to be favorable for the reduction of overall failure (overall NRR, 0.997) compared to the results of repeated SWL (overall NRR, 0.928). The implementation of decision tree modeling revealed that the cost per retreatment-avoided increased with the introduction of RIRS at an earlier time (first line, second line, third line, fourth line: 18640 USD, 10376 USD, 4294 USD, 3377 USD, respectively). Probabilistic modeling also indicated that the introduction of RIRS as the first line of treatment was least likely to be cost-effective, when compared to other options of introducing RIRS as the second, third, or fourth line of treatment. Conclusion: Performing RIRS as early as possible can be recommended for eligible patients to reduce the overall failure, even if it is not as cost-effective as performing RIRS later.
Abstract
Purpose: This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of treatment with retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) versus repeated shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) in patients with renal calculi. Materials and Methods: The non-retreatment rates (NRRs) and their respective real-world costs for RIRS and SWL were derived through retrospective analysis of health insurance claims data from 2015 to 2017. Decision tree modeling was performed to demonstrate the cost-effectiveness of RIRS. Furthermore, sensitivity analysis was performed to examine the robustness of the results. Results: Analysis of the obtained data showed that NRRs of single SWL ranged from 46% to 56%, whereas NRRs of single RIRS ranged from 75% to 93%. Introducing RIRS early in the treatment sequence was observed to be favorable for the reduction of overall failure (overall NRR, 0.997) compared to the results of repeated SWL (overall NRR, 0.928). The implementation of decision tree modeling revealed that the cost per retreatment-avoided increased with the introduction of RIRS at an earlier time (first line, second line, third line, fourth line: 18640 USD, 10376 USD, 4294 USD, 3377 USD, respectively). Probabilistic modeling also indicated that the introduction of RIRS as the first line of treatment was least likely to be cost-effective, when compared to other options of introducing RIRS as the second, third, or fourth line of treatment. Conclusion: Performing RIRS as early as possible can be recommended for eligible patients to reduce the overall failure, even if it is not as cost-effective as performing RIRS later.
참고문헌 (26)
- Stamatelou KK, "Time trends in reported prevalence of kidney stones in the United States : 1976-1994", Kidney Int, 63, pp.1817~1823 (2003)
- Scales CD Jr, "Prevalence of kidney stones in the United States", Eur Urol, 62, pp.160~165 (2012)
- Raheem OA, "Burden of urolithiasis : trends in prevalence, treatments, and costs", Eur Urol Focus, 3, pp.18~26 (2017)
- Geraghty RM, "Worldwide trends of urinary stone disease treatment over the last two decades : a systematic review", J Endourol, 31, pp.547~556 (2017)
- Türk C, "EAU guidelines on interventional treatment for urolithiasis", Eur Urol, 69, pp.475~482 (2016)
- Donaldson JF, "Systematic review and meta-analysis of the clinical effectiveness of shock wave lithotripsy, retrograde intrarenal surgery, and percutaneous nephrolithotomy for lower-pole renal stones", Eur Urol, 67, pp.612~616 (2015)
- 장기돈, "Impact of Pretreatment Hydronephrosis on the Success Rate of Shock Wave Lithotripsy in Patients with Ureteral Stone", Yonsei Medical Journal, 58(5), pp.1000~1005 (2017), 연세대학교의과대학[DOI]
- Manzoor S, "Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy(ESWL)vs. ureterorenoscopic(URS)manipulation in proximal ureteric stone", J Coll Physicians Surg Pak, 23, pp.726~730 (2013)
- Lawler AC, "Extracorporeal shock wave therapy : current perspectives and future directions", Curr Urol Rep, 18, pp.25~ (2017)
- Perez Castro E, "Differences in ureteroscopic stone treatment and outcomes for distal, mid-, proximal, or multiple ureteral locations : the Clinical Research Office of the Endourological Society ureteroscopy global study", Eur Urol, 66, pp.102~109 (2014)
- Zhang W, "Retrograde intrarenal surgery versus percutaneous nephrolithotomy versus extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy for treatment of lower pole renal stones : a meta-analysis and systematic review", J Endourol, 29, pp.745~759 (2015)
- Zheng C, "Extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery for treatment for renal stones 1-2 cm : a meta-analysis", Urolithiasis, 43, pp.549~556 (2015)
- 정재용, "Digital Videoscopic Retrograde Intrarenal Surgeries for Renal Stones: Time-to-Maximal Stone Length Ratio Analysis", Yonsei Medical Journal, 59(2), pp.303~309 (2018), 연세대학교의과대학[DOI]
- Ergin G, "Shock wave lithotripsy or retrograde intrarenal surgery : which one is more effective for 10-20-mm renal stones in children", Ir J Med Sci, 187, pp.1121~1126 (2018)
- Rassweiler J, "New technology in ureteroscopy and percutaneous nephrolithotomy", Curr Opin Urol, 26, pp.95~106 (2016)
- Sarkissian C, "Patient decision making for asymptomatic renal calculi : balancing benefit and risk", Urology, 81, pp.236~240 (2013)
- Fann CY, "Patient utility measurement for managing ureteral stones : a modified standard gamble approach", Value Health Reg Issues, 1, pp.87~92 (2012)
- "Analysis of the status and treatment pattern of patients with urinary tract stone"[URL]
- Tarazona VC, "Cost-effectiveness analysis of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy versus retrograde intrarenal surgery in the management of small moderated-sized renal stones", Value Health, 20, pp.A490~ (2017)
- 김지애, "Towards Actualizing the Value Potential of Korea Health Insurance Review and Assessment (HIRA) Data as a Resource for Health Research: Strengths, Limitations, Applications, and Strategies for Optimal Use of HIRA Data", Journal of Korean Medical Science, 32(5), pp.718~728 (2017), 대한의학회
- Cone EB, "Cost-effectiveness comparison of ureteral calculi treated with ureteroscopic laser lithotripsy versus shockwave lithotripsy", World J Urol, 35, pp.161~166 (2017)
- Briggs A, "Decision modelling for health economic evaluation" (2006), Oxford University Press;
- Wu CF, "Comparison between extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and semirigid ureterorenoscope with holmium : YAG laser lithotripsy for treating large proximal ureteral stones", J Urol, 172, pp.1899~1902 (2004)
- Childs MA, "Factors influencing urologist treatment preference in surgical management of stone disease", Urology, 79, pp.996~1003 (2012)
- Kuo RL, "Incorporation of patient preferences in the treatment of upper urinary tract calculi : a decision analytical view", J Urol, 162, pp.1913~1918 (1999)
- Bozzini G, "A prospective randomized comparison among SWL, PCNL and RIRS for lower calyceal stones less than 2 cm : a multicenter experience. A better understanding on the treatment options for lower pole stones", World J Urol, 35, pp.1967~1975 (2017)