Cargando…

Economic Evaluation of Transperineal versus Transrectal Devices for Local Anaesthetic Prostate Biopsies

BACKGROUND: Biopsy of the prostate for suspected cancer is usually performed transrectally under local anaesthesia in the outpatient clinic setting. As this involves piercing the bowel wall, the procedure is associated with a risk of infection. Recently, devices that facilitate transperineal biopsy...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wilson, Edward C. F., Wreford, Alice, Tamer, Priya, Leonard, Kelly, Brechka, Hannah, Gnanapragasam, Vincent J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer International Publishing 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8611168/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34241824
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s41669-021-00277-4
_version_ 1784603246696857600
author Wilson, Edward C. F.
Wreford, Alice
Tamer, Priya
Leonard, Kelly
Brechka, Hannah
Gnanapragasam, Vincent J.
author_facet Wilson, Edward C. F.
Wreford, Alice
Tamer, Priya
Leonard, Kelly
Brechka, Hannah
Gnanapragasam, Vincent J.
author_sort Wilson, Edward C. F.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Biopsy of the prostate for suspected cancer is usually performed transrectally under local anaesthesia in the outpatient clinic setting. As this involves piercing the bowel wall, the procedure is associated with a risk of infection. Recently, devices that facilitate transperineal biopsy approaches have been developed that avoid piercing the bowel and so should reduce the risk of infection. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to estimate the cost effectiveness of transperineal versus transrectal ultrasound-guided local anaesthesia procedures for prostate biopsy from the perspective of the UK NHS and to estimate the value of further research in the area. METHODS: a) Decision tree and Markov model synthesising all relevant evidence estimating the life-time costs and QALYs accrued from each biopsy mode. b) Value of information analysis to predict the return from further research and thus guide future research efforts. RESULTS: Transperineal biopsy yields an ICER below £20,000 per QALY gained at a per-procedure device acquisition cost below £81, or £41 for cost-neutrality. These results are driven by differences in consumables cost, reduced cost of treating infections, and QALY gains associated with reduced infections. There is value in future research on the diagnostic accuracy of transperineal versus transrectal biopsies and the incidence of iatrogenic infection and sepsis; consideration should be given to enriching the patient population with men with intermediate-risk disease. CONCLUSIONS: Transperineal biopsy devices may be cost effective compared with transrectal biopsy at per-procedure acquisition costs below £81 and cost-neutral if under £41. Future research is required to confirm or refute these findings, particularly randomised comparisons of the diagnostic accuracy and infection risks between the methods. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s41669-021-00277-4.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8611168
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer International Publishing
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-86111682021-12-10 Economic Evaluation of Transperineal versus Transrectal Devices for Local Anaesthetic Prostate Biopsies Wilson, Edward C. F. Wreford, Alice Tamer, Priya Leonard, Kelly Brechka, Hannah Gnanapragasam, Vincent J. Pharmacoecon Open Original Research Article BACKGROUND: Biopsy of the prostate for suspected cancer is usually performed transrectally under local anaesthesia in the outpatient clinic setting. As this involves piercing the bowel wall, the procedure is associated with a risk of infection. Recently, devices that facilitate transperineal biopsy approaches have been developed that avoid piercing the bowel and so should reduce the risk of infection. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to estimate the cost effectiveness of transperineal versus transrectal ultrasound-guided local anaesthesia procedures for prostate biopsy from the perspective of the UK NHS and to estimate the value of further research in the area. METHODS: a) Decision tree and Markov model synthesising all relevant evidence estimating the life-time costs and QALYs accrued from each biopsy mode. b) Value of information analysis to predict the return from further research and thus guide future research efforts. RESULTS: Transperineal biopsy yields an ICER below £20,000 per QALY gained at a per-procedure device acquisition cost below £81, or £41 for cost-neutrality. These results are driven by differences in consumables cost, reduced cost of treating infections, and QALY gains associated with reduced infections. There is value in future research on the diagnostic accuracy of transperineal versus transrectal biopsies and the incidence of iatrogenic infection and sepsis; consideration should be given to enriching the patient population with men with intermediate-risk disease. CONCLUSIONS: Transperineal biopsy devices may be cost effective compared with transrectal biopsy at per-procedure acquisition costs below £81 and cost-neutral if under £41. Future research is required to confirm or refute these findings, particularly randomised comparisons of the diagnostic accuracy and infection risks between the methods. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s41669-021-00277-4. Springer International Publishing 2021-07-09 /pmc/articles/PMC8611168/ /pubmed/34241824 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s41669-021-00277-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Research Article
Wilson, Edward C. F.
Wreford, Alice
Tamer, Priya
Leonard, Kelly
Brechka, Hannah
Gnanapragasam, Vincent J.
Economic Evaluation of Transperineal versus Transrectal Devices for Local Anaesthetic Prostate Biopsies
title Economic Evaluation of Transperineal versus Transrectal Devices for Local Anaesthetic Prostate Biopsies
title_full Economic Evaluation of Transperineal versus Transrectal Devices for Local Anaesthetic Prostate Biopsies
title_fullStr Economic Evaluation of Transperineal versus Transrectal Devices for Local Anaesthetic Prostate Biopsies
title_full_unstemmed Economic Evaluation of Transperineal versus Transrectal Devices for Local Anaesthetic Prostate Biopsies
title_short Economic Evaluation of Transperineal versus Transrectal Devices for Local Anaesthetic Prostate Biopsies
title_sort economic evaluation of transperineal versus transrectal devices for local anaesthetic prostate biopsies
topic Original Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8611168/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34241824
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s41669-021-00277-4
work_keys_str_mv AT wilsonedwardcf economicevaluationoftransperinealversustransrectaldevicesforlocalanaestheticprostatebiopsies
AT wrefordalice economicevaluationoftransperinealversustransrectaldevicesforlocalanaestheticprostatebiopsies
AT tamerpriya economicevaluationoftransperinealversustransrectaldevicesforlocalanaestheticprostatebiopsies
AT leonardkelly economicevaluationoftransperinealversustransrectaldevicesforlocalanaestheticprostatebiopsies
AT brechkahannah economicevaluationoftransperinealversustransrectaldevicesforlocalanaestheticprostatebiopsies
AT gnanapragasamvincentj economicevaluationoftransperinealversustransrectaldevicesforlocalanaestheticprostatebiopsies