Health technology assessment (HTA) of prostatic urethral lift (PUL) for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in the Italian context.

IF 0.4 Q4 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Global & Regional Health Technology Assessment Pub Date : 2025-07-22 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.33393/grhta.2025.3401
Agostino Fortunato, Filippo Rumi, Debora Antonini, Michele Basile, Eugenio Di Brino
{"title":"Health technology assessment (HTA) of prostatic urethral lift (PUL) for the treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) in the Italian context.","authors":"Agostino Fortunato, Filippo Rumi, Debora Antonini, Michele Basile, Eugenio Di Brino","doi":"10.33393/grhta.2025.3401","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Health technology assessment (HTA) is a process evaluating various aspects of healthcare technologies to support evidence-based decisions. Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is a common condition among aging men, significantly affecting QoL. Traditional treatments like transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) and Holmium Laser Enucleation (HoLEP) are effective but often associated with complications and sexual dysfunction. The Prostatic Urethral Lift (PUL) system (UroLift) offers a minimally invasive alternative, preserving sexual function and ensuring faster recovery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using the EUnetHTA Core Model 3.0, UroLift was evaluated across nine domains, combining a systematic review of literature, expert consultation, and real-world evidence. A Budget Impact Model (BIM) simulated treatment pathways over five years, comparing UroLift with TURP and HoLEP.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>As the analysis shows, despite the higher initial acquisition cost, UroLift generates savings for the NHS in all the years considered within the analysis. Specifically, savings are derived from the lower incidence of adverse events and complications, both post-operative and in the long term, implying lower inpatient costs and less use of human resources. As anticipated, savings begin in the first year with a differential between the two scenarios considered at 57,747.40 and peak in the fifth year with savings of approximately €1.35 million, for a total estimated savings over the considered time horizon, considering the market shares, of €3,154,997.63.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>UroLift demonstrates clinical efficacy, faster recovery, and sexual function preservation while generating cost savings, supporting its integration into BPH management pathways in Italy.</p>","PeriodicalId":12627,"journal":{"name":"Global & Regional Health Technology Assessment","volume":"12 ","pages":"177-185"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12282465/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global & Regional Health Technology Assessment","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33393/grhta.2025.3401","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Health technology assessment (HTA) is a process evaluating various aspects of healthcare technologies to support evidence-based decisions. Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is a common condition among aging men, significantly affecting QoL. Traditional treatments like transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) and Holmium Laser Enucleation (HoLEP) are effective but often associated with complications and sexual dysfunction. The Prostatic Urethral Lift (PUL) system (UroLift) offers a minimally invasive alternative, preserving sexual function and ensuring faster recovery.

Methods: Using the EUnetHTA Core Model 3.0, UroLift was evaluated across nine domains, combining a systematic review of literature, expert consultation, and real-world evidence. A Budget Impact Model (BIM) simulated treatment pathways over five years, comparing UroLift with TURP and HoLEP.

Results: As the analysis shows, despite the higher initial acquisition cost, UroLift generates savings for the NHS in all the years considered within the analysis. Specifically, savings are derived from the lower incidence of adverse events and complications, both post-operative and in the long term, implying lower inpatient costs and less use of human resources. As anticipated, savings begin in the first year with a differential between the two scenarios considered at 57,747.40 and peak in the fifth year with savings of approximately €1.35 million, for a total estimated savings over the considered time horizon, considering the market shares, of €3,154,997.63.

Conclusions: UroLift demonstrates clinical efficacy, faster recovery, and sexual function preservation while generating cost savings, supporting its integration into BPH management pathways in Italy.

意大利前列腺尿道提升术(PUL)治疗良性前列腺增生(BPH)的健康技术评估(HTA)
背景:卫生技术评估(HTA)是一个评估卫生保健技术的各个方面以支持循证决策的过程。良性前列腺增生(BPH)是老年男性的常见病,显著影响生活质量。传统的治疗方法,如经尿道前列腺切除术(TURP)和钬激光摘除(HoLEP)是有效的,但往往伴随着并发症和性功能障碍。前列腺尿道提升(PUL)系统(UroLift)提供了一种微创的选择,保留性功能并确保更快的恢复。方法:采用EUnetHTA Core Model 3.0,结合文献系统综述、专家咨询和现实证据,对UroLift进行9个领域的评估。预算影响模型(BIM)模拟了五年的治疗路径,将UroLift与TURP和HoLEP进行了比较。结果:正如分析所显示的,尽管初始收购成本较高,但在分析所考虑的所有年份中,UroLift都为NHS节省了成本。具体来说,节省来自术后和长期不良事件和并发症的发生率较低,这意味着住院费用较低,人力资源的使用较少。正如预期的那样,第一年开始节省,两种情况之间的差额为57,747.40,第五年达到峰值,节省约135万欧元,考虑到市场份额,在考虑的时间范围内估计总节省为3,154,997.63欧元。结论:UroLift具有临床疗效、更快的恢复和性功能保护,同时节省了成本,支持其融入意大利BPH管理途径。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Global & Regional Health Technology Assessment
Global & Regional Health Technology Assessment HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
20.00%
发文量
27
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: Global & Regional Health Technology Assessment (GRHTA) is a peer-reviewed, open access journal which aims to promote health technology assessment and economic evaluation, enabling choices among alternative therapeutical paths or procedures with different clinical and economic outcomes. GRHTA is a unique journal having three different editorial boards who focus on their respective geographical expertise.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信