Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Urolithiasis 4/2016

16.10.2015 | Original Paper

Comparison of flexible ureteroscopy and micropercutaneous nephrolithotomy in terms of cost-effectiveness: analysis of 111 procedures

verfasst von: Murat Bagcioglu, Aslan Demir, Hasan Sulhan, Mert Ali Karadag, Mehmet Uslu, Umit Yener Tekdogan

Erschienen in: Urolithiasis | Ausgabe 4/2016

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

The objective of this study was to audit the costs of retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS) and micropercutaneous nephrolithotomy (microperc) and compare them in terms of cost-effectiveness. We performed a retrospective analysis of 63 patients who underwent microperc and 48 patients who underwent RIRS. The cases, performed between first use and first repair, were used for this initial study. The costs associated with performing RIRS and microperc, including the costs of devices, disposables, hospitalization, and additional required treatments, were audited. The main perioperative and postoperative parameters were collected, including operation time, JJ stent requirements, used disposables, stone-free rates, and complications. Statistical analyses of the means of continuous variables were performed using Student’s t test and the Mann–Whitney U test. Categorical variables were analyzed using Chi-squared tests. The mean cost of RIRS was $917.13 ± 73.62 and the mean cost of microperc was $831.58 ± 79.51; this difference was statistically significant (p < 0.001). The mean operation time of the RIRS group was significantly shorter than the microperc group (55.62 ± 19.62 min and 98.50 ± 29.64 min, respectively, p < 0.001). The assessment of required additional treatment showed that it was significantly higher in the RIRS group than the microperc group (p = 0.02). The stone-free rate for RIRS was 66.6 and 80.9 % for microperc; this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.12). In our series, the use of microperc is less expensive than RIRS due to additional required treatments and ancillary equipment in RIRS. RIRS is more effective than microperc in terms of operation time and more effective use of operation rooms.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Kijvikai K, Haleblian GE, Preminger GM, de la Rosette J (2007) Shock wave lithotripsy or ureteroscopy for the management of proximal ureteral calculi: an old discussion revisited. J Urol 178:1157–1163CrossRefPubMed Kijvikai K, Haleblian GE, Preminger GM, de la Rosette J (2007) Shock wave lithotripsy or ureteroscopy for the management of proximal ureteral calculi: an old discussion revisited. J Urol 178:1157–1163CrossRefPubMed
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Matlaga BR (2009) Contemporary surgical management of upper urinary tract calculi. J Urol 181:2152–2156CrossRefPubMed Matlaga BR (2009) Contemporary surgical management of upper urinary tract calculi. J Urol 181:2152–2156CrossRefPubMed
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Tepeler A, Sarica K (2013) Standard, mini, ultra-mini, and micro percutaneous nephrolithotomy: what is next? A novel labeling system for percutaneous nephrolithotomy according to the size of the access sheath used during procedure. Urolithiasis 41:367–368CrossRefPubMed Tepeler A, Sarica K (2013) Standard, mini, ultra-mini, and micro percutaneous nephrolithotomy: what is next? A novel labeling system for percutaneous nephrolithotomy according to the size of the access sheath used during procedure. Urolithiasis 41:367–368CrossRefPubMed
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Cape JD, Beca JM, Hoch JS (2013) Introduction to Cost-Effectiveness Analysis for Clinicians. Univ Toronto Med J 90:103–105 Cape JD, Beca JM, Hoch JS (2013) Introduction to Cost-Effectiveness Analysis for Clinicians. Univ Toronto Med J 90:103–105
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Goodwin WE, Casey WC, Woolf W (1955) Percutaneous trocar (needle) nephrostomy in hydronephrosis. J Am Med Assoc 157:891–894CrossRefPubMed Goodwin WE, Casey WC, Woolf W (1955) Percutaneous trocar (needle) nephrostomy in hydronephrosis. J Am Med Assoc 157:891–894CrossRefPubMed
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Fernström I, Johansson B (1976) Percutaneous pyelolithotomy. A new extraction technique. Scand J Urol Nephrol 10:257–259PubMed Fernström I, Johansson B (1976) Percutaneous pyelolithotomy. A new extraction technique. Scand J Urol Nephrol 10:257–259PubMed
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Michel MS, Trojan L, Rassweiler JJ (2007) Complications in percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Eur Urol 51:899–906 (discussion 906) Michel MS, Trojan L, Rassweiler JJ (2007) Complications in percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Eur Urol 51:899–906 (discussion 906)
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Kukreja R, Desai M, Patel S et al (2004) Factors affecting blood loss during percutaneous nephrolithotomy: prospective study. J Endourol 18:715–722CrossRefPubMed Kukreja R, Desai M, Patel S et al (2004) Factors affecting blood loss during percutaneous nephrolithotomy: prospective study. J Endourol 18:715–722CrossRefPubMed
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Karadag MA, Demir A, Cecen K et al (2014) Flexible ureterorenoscopy versus semirigid ureteroscopy for the treatment of proximal ureteral stones: a retrospective comparative analysis of 124 patients. Urol J 11:1867–1872PubMed Karadag MA, Demir A, Cecen K et al (2014) Flexible ureterorenoscopy versus semirigid ureteroscopy for the treatment of proximal ureteral stones: a retrospective comparative analysis of 124 patients. Urol J 11:1867–1872PubMed
11.
Zurück zum Zitat De la Rosette J, Denstedt J, Geavlete P et al (2014) The clinical research office of the endourological society ureteroscopy global study: indications, complications, and outcomes in 11,885 patients. J Endourol 28:131–139CrossRefPubMed De la Rosette J, Denstedt J, Geavlete P et al (2014) The clinical research office of the endourological society ureteroscopy global study: indications, complications, and outcomes in 11,885 patients. J Endourol 28:131–139CrossRefPubMed
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Bader MJ, Gratzke C, Seitz M et al (2011) The “all-seeing needle”: initial results of an optical puncture system confirming access in percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Eur Urol 59:1054–1059CrossRefPubMed Bader MJ, Gratzke C, Seitz M et al (2011) The “all-seeing needle”: initial results of an optical puncture system confirming access in percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Eur Urol 59:1054–1059CrossRefPubMed
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Gurbuz C, Atış G, Arikan O et al (2014) The cost analysis of flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy in 302 cases. Urolithiasis 42:155–158CrossRefPubMed Gurbuz C, Atış G, Arikan O et al (2014) The cost analysis of flexible ureteroscopic lithotripsy in 302 cases. Urolithiasis 42:155–158CrossRefPubMed
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Sabnis RB, Ganesamoni R, Doshi A et al (2013) Micropercutaneous nephrolithotomy (microperc) vs retrograde intrarenal surgery for the management of small renal calculi: a randomized controlled trial. BJU Int 112:355–361CrossRefPubMed Sabnis RB, Ganesamoni R, Doshi A et al (2013) Micropercutaneous nephrolithotomy (microperc) vs retrograde intrarenal surgery for the management of small renal calculi: a randomized controlled trial. BJU Int 112:355–361CrossRefPubMed
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Ramón de Fata F, García-Tello A, Andrés G et al (2014) Comparative study of retrograde intrarenal surgery and micropercutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment of intermediate-sized kidney stones. Actas Urol Esp 38:576–583CrossRefPubMed Ramón de Fata F, García-Tello A, Andrés G et al (2014) Comparative study of retrograde intrarenal surgery and micropercutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment of intermediate-sized kidney stones. Actas Urol Esp 38:576–583CrossRefPubMed
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Demir A, Karadağ MA, Ceçen K et al (2014) Pneumatic versus laser ureteroscopic lithotripsy: a comparison of initial outcomes and cost. Int Urol Nephrol 46:2087–2093CrossRefPubMed Demir A, Karadağ MA, Ceçen K et al (2014) Pneumatic versus laser ureteroscopic lithotripsy: a comparison of initial outcomes and cost. Int Urol Nephrol 46:2087–2093CrossRefPubMed
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Hatipoglu NK, Tepeler A, Buldu I et al (2014) Initial experience of micro-percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment of renal calculi in 140 renal units. Urolithiasis 42:159–164CrossRefPubMed Hatipoglu NK, Tepeler A, Buldu I et al (2014) Initial experience of micro-percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment of renal calculi in 140 renal units. Urolithiasis 42:159–164CrossRefPubMed
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Tepeler A, Armagan A, Sancaktutar AA et al (2013) The role of microperc in the treatment of symptomatic lower pole renal calculi. J Endourol 27:13–18CrossRefPubMed Tepeler A, Armagan A, Sancaktutar AA et al (2013) The role of microperc in the treatment of symptomatic lower pole renal calculi. J Endourol 27:13–18CrossRefPubMed
Metadaten
Titel
Comparison of flexible ureteroscopy and micropercutaneous nephrolithotomy in terms of cost-effectiveness: analysis of 111 procedures
verfasst von
Murat Bagcioglu
Aslan Demir
Hasan Sulhan
Mert Ali Karadag
Mehmet Uslu
Umit Yener Tekdogan
Publikationsdatum
16.10.2015
Verlag
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in
Urolithiasis / Ausgabe 4/2016
Print ISSN: 2194-7228
Elektronische ISSN: 2194-7236
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00240-015-0828-7

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2016

Urolithiasis 4/2016 Zur Ausgabe

Update Urologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.