Cargando…
Repair Rate and Associated Costs of Reusable Flexible Ureteroscopes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
CONTEXT: The refined mechanics of a flexible ureteroscope (fURS) are vulnerable to damage. Sending the fURS for repair is costly and has driven interest toward estimating the resources used for fURS repairs. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review available literature and to estimate the total weighted...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8810356/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35128483 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.euros.2021.12.013 |
_version_ | 1784644238132117504 |
---|---|
author | Rindorf, Dinah K. Tailly, Thomas Kamphuis, Guido M. Larsen, Sara Somani, Bhaskar K. Traxer, Olivier Koo, Kevin |
author_facet | Rindorf, Dinah K. Tailly, Thomas Kamphuis, Guido M. Larsen, Sara Somani, Bhaskar K. Traxer, Olivier Koo, Kevin |
author_sort | Rindorf, Dinah K. |
collection | PubMed |
description | CONTEXT: The refined mechanics of a flexible ureteroscope (fURS) are vulnerable to damage. Sending the fURS for repair is costly and has driven interest toward estimating the resources used for fURS repairs. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review available literature and to estimate the total weighted repair rate of an fURS and the average repair cost per ureteroscopy. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic review was conducted by searching the MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases. The average costs of all repairs identified in the included studies were extracted. A random-effect model was used to calculate the pooled total fURS repair rate. The total weighted repair rate and average cost per repair were multiplied to provide an average cost of repair per ureteroscopy procedure. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: We identified 18 studies that fulfilled the inclusion criteria, which included 411 repairs from 5900 investigated ureteroscopy procedures. The calculated weighted repair rate was 6.5% ± 0.745% (95% confidence interval: 5.0–7.9%; I(2) = 75.3%), equivalent to 15 ureteroscopy procedures before repair. The average cost per repair was 6808 USD; according to the weighted repair rate of 6.5%, this corresponds to an average repair cost of 441 USD per procedure. Egger’s regression test did not reveal a significant publication bias (p = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first meta-analysis to estimate the repair rate of the fURS used for ureteroscopy. Our analysis demonstrates a repair rate of 6.5%, equivalent to 15 ureteroscopy procedures between fURS repairs and a repair cost of 441 USD per procedure. Ureteroscopy practices should consider fURS breakage rates and repair costs to optimize the use of reusable versus disposable devices. PATIENT SUMMARY: We reviewed available literature investigating the repair rate of a flexible ureteroscope (fURS). We found that fURSs are sent for repair after every 15 ureteroscopy procedures, corresponding to 441 USD per procedure in repair cost. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8810356 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-88103562022-02-04 Repair Rate and Associated Costs of Reusable Flexible Ureteroscopes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis Rindorf, Dinah K. Tailly, Thomas Kamphuis, Guido M. Larsen, Sara Somani, Bhaskar K. Traxer, Olivier Koo, Kevin Eur Urol Open Sci Review – Endo-urology CONTEXT: The refined mechanics of a flexible ureteroscope (fURS) are vulnerable to damage. Sending the fURS for repair is costly and has driven interest toward estimating the resources used for fURS repairs. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review available literature and to estimate the total weighted repair rate of an fURS and the average repair cost per ureteroscopy. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A systematic review was conducted by searching the MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases. The average costs of all repairs identified in the included studies were extracted. A random-effect model was used to calculate the pooled total fURS repair rate. The total weighted repair rate and average cost per repair were multiplied to provide an average cost of repair per ureteroscopy procedure. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: We identified 18 studies that fulfilled the inclusion criteria, which included 411 repairs from 5900 investigated ureteroscopy procedures. The calculated weighted repair rate was 6.5% ± 0.745% (95% confidence interval: 5.0–7.9%; I(2) = 75.3%), equivalent to 15 ureteroscopy procedures before repair. The average cost per repair was 6808 USD; according to the weighted repair rate of 6.5%, this corresponds to an average repair cost of 441 USD per procedure. Egger’s regression test did not reveal a significant publication bias (p = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first meta-analysis to estimate the repair rate of the fURS used for ureteroscopy. Our analysis demonstrates a repair rate of 6.5%, equivalent to 15 ureteroscopy procedures between fURS repairs and a repair cost of 441 USD per procedure. Ureteroscopy practices should consider fURS breakage rates and repair costs to optimize the use of reusable versus disposable devices. PATIENT SUMMARY: We reviewed available literature investigating the repair rate of a flexible ureteroscope (fURS). We found that fURSs are sent for repair after every 15 ureteroscopy procedures, corresponding to 441 USD per procedure in repair cost. Elsevier 2022-01-29 /pmc/articles/PMC8810356/ /pubmed/35128483 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.euros.2021.12.013 Text en © 2022 The Author(s) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Review – Endo-urology Rindorf, Dinah K. Tailly, Thomas Kamphuis, Guido M. Larsen, Sara Somani, Bhaskar K. Traxer, Olivier Koo, Kevin Repair Rate and Associated Costs of Reusable Flexible Ureteroscopes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis |
title | Repair Rate and Associated Costs of Reusable Flexible Ureteroscopes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis |
title_full | Repair Rate and Associated Costs of Reusable Flexible Ureteroscopes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | Repair Rate and Associated Costs of Reusable Flexible Ureteroscopes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Repair Rate and Associated Costs of Reusable Flexible Ureteroscopes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis |
title_short | Repair Rate and Associated Costs of Reusable Flexible Ureteroscopes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis |
title_sort | repair rate and associated costs of reusable flexible ureteroscopes: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
topic | Review – Endo-urology |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8810356/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35128483 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.euros.2021.12.013 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT rindorfdinahk repairrateandassociatedcostsofreusableflexibleureteroscopesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT taillythomas repairrateandassociatedcostsofreusableflexibleureteroscopesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT kamphuisguidom repairrateandassociatedcostsofreusableflexibleureteroscopesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT larsensara repairrateandassociatedcostsofreusableflexibleureteroscopesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT somanibhaskark repairrateandassociatedcostsofreusableflexibleureteroscopesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT traxerolivier repairrateandassociatedcostsofreusableflexibleureteroscopesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT kookevin repairrateandassociatedcostsofreusableflexibleureteroscopesasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |