A comprehensive analysis of clinical, quality of life, and cost-effectiveness outcomes of key treatment options for benign prostatic hyperplasia

Reoperation Rate for Residual/Regrowth Adenoma Following Transurethral Interventions for Benign Prostatic Enlargement: Results from a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Comparative Randomized Studies

Objective: To perform a systematic review to assess the incidence of reoperation rate for residual/regrowth adenoma after transurethral surgeries for benign prostatic enlargement. Materials and Methods: A systematic literature search was performed on November 12, 2023, using Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, and Scopus. We only included randomized studies comparing monopolar (M)/bipolar (B) transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) vs ablation vs enucleation procedures. Incidence of reoperation was assessed using the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel Method and reported as risk ratio (RR), 95% confidence interval (CI), and p-values. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. Evidence synthesis: Forty-eight studies were included. Six studies compared enucleation vs TURP, 41 ablation vs TURP, and 1 study enucleation vs ablation vs TURP, encompassing 457 patients in enucleation, 2259 in ablation, and 2517 in the TURP group. The pooled incidence of reoperation was 6.2%, 0.7%, 2.3%, and 4.3% after ablation, enucleation, M-TURP, and B-TURP, respectively. Meta-analysis showed that the incidence of reoperation was significantly lower in the enucleation group (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.10-0.81, p = 0.02), but the difference accounted only in studies with follow-up between 1 and 3 years (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.04-0.85, p = 0.03). The incidence of reoperation was significantly lower in the enucleation compared with the B-TURP group (RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.03-0.77, p = 0.02). Meta-analysis showed that the incidence of reoperation was significantly higher in the ablation group (RR 1.81, 95% CI 1.33-2.47, p = 0.0002), but there was no difference in studies with follow-up up to 1 year (odds ratio 1.78 95% CI 0.97-3.29, p = 0.06) longer than 5 years (RR 2.02, 95% CI 0.71-5.79, p = 0.19). The incidence of reoperation was significantly higher in the ablation compared with the M-TURP group (RR 1.91, 95% CI 1.44-2.54, p < 0.0001). Conclusions: In mid-term follow-up, reoperation rate for residual/regrowth adenoma was significantly lower after enucleation, although was significantly higher after ablation compared with TURP.

Evaluation of Private Payer and Patient Out-of-Pocket Costs Associated With the Surgical Management of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate and compare the financial burden of various surgical interventions for the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH).

METHODS

We identified commercially insured men with a diagnosis of BPH who underwent a procedure of interest (simple prostatectomy (SP), transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP), photovaporization of the prostate (PVP), prostatic urethral lift (PUL), or water vapor thermal therapy (WVTT)) between 2015 and 2021 with the OptumLabs Data Warehouse. Primary outcome was total health care costs (THC) which included both patient out-of-pocket (OOP) and health plan paid costs for the index procedure and combined follow-up years 1-5. A generalized linear model was used to estimate adjusted costs controlling for demographic and clinical characteristics. Patients undergoing WVTT were excluded from extended follow-up analyses due to limited data.

RESULTS

Among 25,407 patients with BPH, 10,117 (40%) underwent TURP, 6353 (25%) underwent PUL, 5411 (21%) underwent PVP, 1319 (5%) underwent SP, 1243 (5%) underwent WVTT, and 964 (4%) underwent HoLEP. Index procedure costs varied significantly with WVTT being the least costly [THC: $2637 (95% confidence interval (CI): $2513-$2761)], and SP being the costliest [THC: $14,423 (95% CI: $12,772-$16,075)]. For aggregate index and 5-year follow-up costs, HoLEP ($31,926 [95% CI: $29,704-$34,148]) was the least costly and PUL ($36,596 [95% CI: $35,369-37,823]) was the costliest.

CONCLUSION

BPH surgical treatment is associated with significant system-level health care costs. The level of impact varies between procedures. Minimally invasive options, such as WVTT, may offer initial cost reductions; however, HoLEP and SP are associated with lower follow-up costs.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of minimally invasive surgical treatments for benign prostatic hyperplasia: implications for Japan's public healthcare system

AIMS

Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) represents a significant public health issue in Japan. This study evaluated the lifetime cost-effectiveness of water vapor energy therapy (WAVE) versus prostatic urethral lift (PUL) for men with moderate-to-severe BPH from a public healthcare payer's perspective in Japan.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A decision analytic model compared WAVE to PUL among males in Japan. Clinical effectiveness and adverse event (AE) inputs were obtained from a systematic literature review. Resource utilization and cost inputs were derived from the Medical Data Vision database and medical service fee national data in Japan. Experts reviewed and validated model input parameters. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to determine how changes in the values of uncertain parameters affect the model results.

RESULTS

Throughout patients' lifetimes, WAVE was associated with higher quality-adjusted life years (0.920 vs. 0.911 year 1; 15.564 vs. 15.388 lifetime) and lower total costs (¥734,134 vs. ¥888,110 year 1; ¥961,595 vs. ¥1,429,458 lifetime) compared to PUL, indicating that WAVE is a more effective and less costly (i.e. dominant) treatment strategy across all time horizons. Lifetime cost-savings for the Japanese healthcare system per patient treated with WAVE instead of PUL were ¥467,863. The 32.7% cost difference between WAVE and PUL was predominantly driven by lower WAVE surgical retreatment rates (4.9% vs. 19.2% for WAVE vs PUL, respectively, at 5 years) and AE rates (hematuria 11.8% vs. 25.7%, dysuria 16.9% vs. 34.3%, pelvic pain 2.9% vs. 17.9%, and urinary incontinence 0.4% vs. 1.3% for WAVE vs PUL, respectively, at 3 months). Model findings were robust to changes in parameter input values.

LIMITATIONS

The model represents a simplification of complex factors involved in resource allocation decision-making.

CONCLUSIONS

Driven by lower retreatment and AE rates, WAVE was a cost-effective and cost-saving treatment for moderate-to-severe BPH in Japan compared to PUL, providing better outcomes at lower costs to the healthcare system.

Comparison of Minimally Invasive Procedures for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia: A Cost-effectiveness Analysis

Background Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is a disease that affects millions of U.S. men and is costly to treat. Purpose To compare the cost-effectiveness of four minimally invasive therapies (MITs) and medical management for the treatment of BPH. Materials and Methods A cost-effectiveness analysis from a payer's perspective with Markov modeling was performed, comparing prostatic artery embolization (PAE), prostatic urethral lift, aquablation, water vapor thermal therapy, and medical management for BPH spanning a time horizon of 5 years. The model incorporated the probability of procedural complications and recurrent symptoms necessitating retreatment, which were extracted from published studies with long-term follow-up. Costs were based on Medicare reimbursements using CPT codes for ambulatory surgery centers. Outcomes were measured using the quality-adjusted life year (QALY), incorporating both life quality and expectancy. Statistical analyses included a base case calculation (using the most probable value of each parameter) and probabilistic and deterministic sensitivity analyses. Results In the base case calculation, outcomes for the strategies were comparable, with a difference of 0.030 QALY (11 days of life in perfect health) between the most (PAE) and least (medical management) effective strategies. PAE was the most cost-effective strategy relative to medical management, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $64 842 per QALY. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed PAE was more cost-effective compared with prostatic urethral lift, aquablation, water vapor therapy, and medical management in pairwise comparisons. In sensitivity analysis of retreatment risk, PAE remained the most cost-effective strategy until its repeat treatment rates exceeded 2.30% per 6 months, at which point water vapor therapy became the optimal choice. PAE was the most cost-effective procedure when its procedural cost was lower than $4755. Aquablation and prostatic urethral lift became more cost-effective when their procedural costs were lower than $3015 and $1097, respectively. Conclusion This modeling-based study showed that PAE appears to be a cost-effective modality among medical management and MITs for patients with BPH, with comparable outcomes to prostatic urethral lift, water vapor therapy, and aquablation at a lower expected cost. © RSNA, 2023 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Gemmete in this issue.

Reoperation after surgical treatment for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review

Context

Surgical treatment is important for male lower urinary tract symptom (LUTS) management, but there are few reviews of the risks of reoperation.

Objective

To systematically evaluate the current evidence regarding the reoperation rates of surgical treatment for LUTS in accordance with current recommendations and guidelines.

Evidence acquisition

Eligible studies published up to July 2023, were searched for in the PubMed® (National Library of Medicine, Bethesda, MD, USA), Embase® (Elsevier, Amsterdam, the Netherlands), and Web of Science™ (Clarivate™, Philadelphia, PA, USA) databases. STATA® (StataCorp LP, College Station, TX, USA) software was used to conduct the meta-analysis. Random-effects models were used to calculate the pooled incidences (PIs) of reoperation and the 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

Evidence synthesis

A total of 119 studies with 130,106 patients were included. The reoperation rate of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) at 1, 2, 3, and 5 years was 4.0%, 5.0%, 6.0%, and 7.7%, respectively. The reoperation rate of plasma kinetic loop resection of the prostate (PKRP) at 1, 2, 3, and 5 years was 3.5%, 3.6%, 5.7%, and 6.6%, respectively. The reoperation rate of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) at 1, 2, 3, and 5 years was 2.4%, 3.3%, 5.4%, and 6.6%, respectively. The reoperation rate of photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) at 1, 2, 3, and 5 years was 3.3%, 4.1%, 6.7%, and 7.1%, respectively. The reoperation rate of surgery with AquaBeam® at 1, 2, 3, and 5 years was 2.6%, 3.1%, 3.0%, and 4.1%, respectively. The reoperation rate of prostatic artery embolization (PAE) at 1, 2, 3, and 5 years was 12.2%, 20.0%, 26.4%, and 23.8%, respectively. The reoperation rate of transurethral microwave thermotherapy (TUMT) at 1, 2, 3, and 5 years was 9.9%, 19.9%, 23.3%, and 31.2%, respectively. The reoperation rate of transurethral incision of the prostate (TUIP) at 5 years was 13.4%. The reoperation rate of open prostatectomy (OP) at 1 and 5 years was 1.3% and 4.4%, respectively. The reoperation rate of thulium laser enucleation of the prostate (ThuLEP) at 1, 2, and 5 years was 3.7%, 7.7%, and 8.4%, respectively.

Conclusion

Our results summarized the reoperation rates of 10 surgical procedures over follow-up durations of 1, 2, 3, and 5 years, which could provide reference for urologists and LUTS patients.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO, identifier CRD42023445780.

Outcomes of holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) for very large-sized benign prostatic hyperplasia (over 150 mL): open simple prostatectomy is dead

INTRODUCTION

Our study aimed to describe the outcomes of transurethral enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) for large-sized benign prostatic hyperplasia over 150 mL (bBPH).

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective, descriptive, and analytical study of patients undergoing HoLEP for bBPH. The primary endpoint was the success of the procedure, defined by a mixed criteria: complete endoscopic enucleation of the prostate, absence of blood transfusion or reoperation for bleeding, post-operative improvement of quality of life (assessed by a ≥ 2 points increase at in the 8th question of the IPSS test) and post-operative continence (no pads use) at 3 months.

RESULTS

Eighty-one patients were included with a mean age of 73.9 ± 7.3 and a mean measured prostate volume of 183.3 ± 34.5 cc. The mean operative time was 57.5 ± 29.7 min and the average wet weight of resected tissue removed was 151.8 ± 44.7 g. Mean hospitalization stay was 1.3 ± 0.7 days with a mean post-operative catheterization period of 1.9 ± 0.9 days. The success of the surgery was achieved in 77 patients (95%). Functional improvements were found at 1 and 6 months for Qmax, post-void residual, IPSS and QoL-IPSS. The 30-day complication rate was 9.9%. The average PSA level dropped from 14.8 ± 11.6 ng/mL at baseline to 0.8 ± 0.5 ng/mL at 6 months.

CONCLUSION

HoLEP for bBPH is both safe and efficient. Regarding the benefit/risk balance, it should be highlighted as the gold standard for the management of big BPH.

A Review of Combined Phosphodiesterase-5-Inhibitors and α-Blockers versus Phosphodiesterase-5-Inhibitors Alone for Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms due to Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

Guidelines from the American Urological Association (AUA) and the European Association of Urology (EAU) present conflicting recommendations regarding combination therapy of phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitors (PDE5is) with α-blockers to treat benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) with lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS). Use of PDE5is is widespread in the population of patients with LUTS/BPH. In this scoping review, we examine the evidence regarding the safety and efficacy of combined PDE5is and α-blockers compared to PDE5i medications alone. A search was conducted using PubMed, Cochrane, and Web of Science to identify manuscripts discussing the safety of PDE5i and α-blockers in combination or comparing this combination to PDE5is alone in the treatment of LUTS/BPH. Study designs, data, and conclusions were qualitatively analyzed. Combination therapy was found to be safe across all studies; importantly, no evidence documents increased risk of hypotension. Most studies reported added improvement in symptom and quality of life scores compared to PDE5i alone, with additional International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) change ranging from -1.30 to -8.50 and IPSS quality of life score change ranging from -0.15 to -1.50. Objective metrics such as postvoid residual volumes and maximum flow rate were inconsistently reported. Taken together, the current body of data suggests that combining PDE5i α-blocker therapy is safe and that there are opportunities for additional symptomatic improvement, though it should be utilized for select patients. Situations with particular utility could include patients with comorbid erectile dysfunction or without sufficient improvement on monotherapy.

Patients' perspectives on attributes while choosing minimally invasive surgery for benign prostatic hyperplasia procedures: Experience from men undergoing water vapor thermal therapy

Objective To understand which attributes patients consider important when selecting treatment options for benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) given differences in clinical and economic outcomes. Methods Men (n=170) with lower urinary tract symptoms due to BPH who underwent water vapor thermal therapy (WVTT) between April 2019 and November 2020 in a Toronto urological clinic were invited to participate in an online survey. The survey included eight attributes of BPH surgical procedures and five attributes of WVTT. Patients were asked how important each attribute was to them before they selected a BPH procedure and decided to undergo WVTT. Results In total, 128 respondents (75%) completed the survey. A majority of the respondents were White (88%), married (83%), and aged 60-69 years old (45%). Approximately 97% of respondents rated the ability to avoid further BPH treatments as "very important" or "extremely important", followed by duration to return to normal activities (79%), and wait times to receive the procedure (57%). Only 47% of patients reported post-procedural catheterization was important. For WVTT, 98% of the respondents rated avoiding more invasive surgical treatments and 88% rated a quick recovery as important attributes. Conclusions Among men with moderate-to-severe BPH undergoing WVTT, the most important attributes for selecting a BPH surgical procedure were avoiding further BPH treatments, returning quickly to normal activities, and reducing treatment wait times. The majority of men chose WVTT to avoid more invasive procedures and had a quick recovery.

Cost-effectiveness of alternative first- and second-line treatments for benign prostatic hyperplasia in Singapore

BACKGROUND

Minimally invasive surgical therapies, such as water vapor thermal therapy (WVTT) and prostatic urethral lift (PUL), are typically second-line options for patients in whom medical management (MM) failed but who are unwilling or unsuitable to undergo invasive transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). However, the incremental cost-effectiveness of WVTT or PUL as first- or second-line therapy is unknown. We evaluated the incremental cost-effectiveness of alternative first- and second-line treatments for patients with moderate-to-severe benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in Singapore to help policymakers make subsidy decisions based on value for money.

METHODS

We considered six stepped-up treatment strategies, beginning with MM, WVTT, PUL or TURP. In each strategy, patients requiring retreatment advance to a more invasive treatment until TURP, which may be undergone twice. A Markov cohort model was used to simulate transitions between BPH severity states and retreatment, accruing costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) over a lifetime horizon.

RESULTS

In moderate patients, strategies beginning with MM had similar cost and effectiveness, and first-line WVTT was incrementally cost-effective to first-line MM (33,307 SGD/QALY). First-line TURP was not incrementally cost-effective to first-line WVTT (159,361 SGD/QALY). For severe patients, WVTT was incrementally cost-effective to MM as a first-line treatment (30,133 SGD/QALY) and to TURP as a second-line treatment following MM (6877 SGD/QALY). TURP was incrementally cost-effective to WVTT as a first-line treatment (48,209 SGD/QALY) in severe patients only. All pathways involving PUL were dominated (higher costs and lower QALYs).

CONCLUSION

Based on the common willingness-to-pay threshold of SGD 50,000/QALY, this study demonstrates the cost-effectiveness of WVTT over MM as first-line treatment for patients with moderate or severe BPH, suggesting it represents good value for money and should be considered for subsidy. PUL is not cost-effective as a first- nor second-line treatment. For patients with severe BPH, TURP as first-line is also cost-effective.

Evaluation of the Cost-Effectiveness of Surgical Treatment Options for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia

OBJECTIVE

To compare the cost-effectiveness of surgical interventions for BPH.

METHODS

Using a Markov model, a cost-utility analysis was performed comparing HoLEP, B-TURP, WVTT, and PUL for prostate size <80cc (index patient 1) and HoLEP and SP for prostate size >80cc (index patient 2). Model probabilities and utility values were drawn from the literature. Analysis was performed at a 5-year time horizon with extrapolation to a lifetime horizon. Primary outcomes included quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), 2021 Medicare costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) with a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

At 5 years, costs per patient for index patient 1 were $3292 (WVTT), $6532 (HoLEP), $6670 (B-TURP), and $10,257 (PUL). HoLEP resulted in the highest QALYs (4.66), followed by B-TURP (4.60), PUL (4.38), and WVTT (4.38). This translated to HoLEP being most cost-effective (ICER $11,847). For index patient 2, HoLEP was less costly ($6,585 vs $15,404) and more effective (4.654 vs 4.650) relative to SP. On sensitivity analysis for index patient 1, B-TURP became most cost-effective if cost of HoLEP increased two-fold or chronic stress incontinence following HoLEP increased ten-fold. When follow-up time was varied, WVTT was preferred at very short follow up (<1 year), and HoLEP became more strongly preferred with longer follow up.

CONCLUSION

At 5 years follow up, HoLEP is a cost-effective surgical treatment for BPH- independent of gland size.

Controversies in Prostate Artery Embolization: Future Best Practice

Prevalence of lower urinary tract symptoms secondary to benign prostatic hyperplasia is correlated with age. Men seeking treatment options with a low side effect profile often turn to prostate artery embolization (PAE). PAE continues to be refined with advanced tools and optimized techniques. Nonetheless, there exist controversies in terms of best practices for the management of lower urinary track symptoms (LUTS) with PAE. These controversies are essential for medical progress. Herein we suggest best practices moving forward based on currently available data. Given extensive safety data, we recommend PAE be considered alongside medical management and as a precursor to surgery. Given demonstrated efficacy across gland sizes, PAE can be performed in a single session, ideally in a hybrid angio-CT suite, without preoperative cross-sectional imaging. PAE should be initially performed with 300- to 500-μm size particles, and instead consider exploring other particles and sizes for repeat PAE. Finally, PAE can also be considered as first-line option for recurrent disease given the efficacy and excellent safety profile. This article is not meant to purport a dogma, but rather to serve as a guide to the experienced practitioner in challenging his or her own biases when performing PAE.