Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Systematic review and economic modelling of effectiveness and cost utility of surgical treatments for men with benign prostatic enlargement

By Tania Lourenco, Nigel Armstrong, James Michael Olu N'Dow, Luke David Vale, Graeme Stewart MacLennan, Cynthia Mary Fraser, Sam McClinton, Alasdair George Coutts, Graham Mowatt, Adrian Maxwell Grant, BPE Study Group, G. Nabi, M. Deverill, R. Pickard and S. Wong


Objectives: To determine the clinical effectiveness and cost utility of procedures alternative to TURP (transurethral resection of the prostate) for benign prostatic enlargement (BPE) unresponsive to expectant, non-surgical treatments.\ud Data sources: Electronic searches of 13 databases to identify relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs).\ud Review methods: Two reviewers independently assessed study quality and extracted data. The International Prostate Symptom Score/American Urological Association (IPSS/AUA) symptom score was the primary outcome; others included quality of life, peak urine flow rate and adverse effects. Costeffectiveness was assessed using a Markov model reflecting likely care pathways.\ud Results: 156 reports describing 88 RCTs were included. Most had fewer than 100 participants (range 12–234). TURP provided consistent, high-level, longterm symptomatic improvement. Minimally invasive procedures resulted in less marked improvement. Ablative procedures gave improvements equivalent to TURP. Holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP) additionally resulted in greater improvement in flow rate. HoLEP is unique amongst the newer technologies in offering an advantage in urodynamic outcomes over TURP, although long-term follow-up data are lacking. Severe blood loss was more common\ud following TURP. Rates of incontinence were similar across all interventions other than transurethral needle ablation (TUNA) and laser coagulation, for which lower rates were reported. Acute retention and reoperation were commoner with newer technologies, especially minimally invasive interventions. The economic model suggested that minimally invasive procedures were unlikely to be cost-effective compared with TURP. Transurethral vaporisation of the prostate (TUVP) was both less costly and less effective than TURP. HoLEP was estimated to be more cost-effective than a single TURP but less effective than a strategy involving repeat TURP if necessary. The base-case analysis suggested an 80% chance that TUVP, followed by HoLEP if required, would be cost-effective at a threshold of £20,000 per quality-adjusted life-year. At a £50,000 threshold, TUVP, followed by TURP as required, would be cost-effective, although considerable uncertainty surrounds this finding. The main limitations are the quantity and quality of the data available, in the context of multiple comparisons.\ud Conclusions: In the absence of strong evidence in favour of newer methods, the standard – TURP – remains both clinically effective and cost-effective. There is a need for further research to establish (i) how many years of medical treatment are necessary to offset the cost of treatment with a minimally invasive or ablative intervention; (ii) more cost-effective alternatives to TURP; and (iii) strategies to improve outcomes after TURP.Chief Scientist Office of the Scottish Government Health Directorate.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Topics: Catheter Ablation, Prostatic Hyperplasia, Surgical Procedures, Minimally Invasive, Transurethral Resection of Prostate, RC Internal medicine
Publisher: National Institute for Health Research
Year: 2008
DOI identifier: 10.3310/hta12350
OAI identifier:
Download PDF:
Sorry, we are unable to provide the full text but you may find it at the following location(s):
  • (external link)
  • Suggested articles


    1. (1994). [Reply to “Re: A critical look at some popular analytical methods”.]
    2. (2001). 1 Clinical and cost-effectiveness of donepezil, rivastigmine and galantamine for Alzheimer’s disease: a rapid and systematic
    3. (2008). 19 A rapid and systematic review and economic evaluation of the clinical and cost-effectiveness of newer drugs for treatment of mania associated with bipolar affective disorder. By Bridle
    4. (2008). 20 Systematic review and economic analysis of the comparative effectiveness of different inhaled corticosteroids and their usage with long-acting beta agonists for the treatment of chronic asthma in children under the age of 12 years.
    5. (2008). 21 Systematic reviews of the effectiveness of day care for people with severe mental disorders: (1) Acute day hospital versus admission; (2) Vocational rehabilitation; (3) Day hospital versus outpatient care. By
    6. (2008). 23 A systematic review and economic model of the effectiveness and costeffectiveness of methylphenidate, dexamfetamine and atomoxetine for the treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder in children
    7. (2008). 23 A systematic review to examine the impact of psycho-educational interventions on health outcomes and costs in adults and children with difficult
    8. (2008). 24 The clinical effectiveness and cost of repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation versus electroconvulsive therapy in severe depression: a multicentre pragmatic randomised controlled trial and economic
    9. (2008). 7 The clinical effectiveness and costeffectiveness of routine dental checks: a systematic review and economic evaluation. By
    10. (2008). A randomised trial comparing photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) and transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) doi
    11. A randomised trial comparing photoselective vaporization of the prostate (PVP) and transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) in treatment of LUTS. doi
    12. (2008). A review by
    13. (2002). A study of the methods used to select review criteria for clinical audit. By Hearnshaw
    14. (2008). A systematic review and economic model of switching from nonglycopeptide to glycopeptide antibiotic prophylaxis for surgery. By Cranny
    15. A systematic review identifies a lack of standardization in methods for handling missing variance data. doi
    16. (2008). All rights reserved. doi
    17. analysis: its causes and consequences. J Clin Epidemiol 2000;53:207–16. Greenland S. Quality scores are useless and 277.
    18. Assessing allocation concealment and 282. blinding in randomised controlled trials: why bother? Evid Based Nurs 2001;4:4–6. Wiebe doi
    19. (1997). Assessment reports published to date
    20. Bad reporting does not mean bad methods for randomised trials: observational study of randomised controlled trials performed by the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group. doi
    21. (2008). Burls A.Health Technology Assessment
    22. Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. doi
    23. (2008). et al.Health Technology Assessment
    24. Gyrus (R) bipolar electrovaporization versus transurethral resection of the prostate: a randomized prospective trial with 1-year follow-up. doi
    25. meta-analysis, with application to studies of ETS and lung cancer. Lung Cancer 1996;14:S171–94. Newcombe RG. Towards a reduction in publication 275. doi
    26. (2008). Midlands Centre for Adverse Drug Reactions, City Hospital NHS Trust, Birmingham Professor Paul Glasziou, Professor of Evidence-Based Medicine,
    27. multicentric randomized comparative study vs TURP. J Urol 1996;155(Suppl 5):408A Love
    28. (2003). No. 1 How important are comprehensive literature searches and the assessment of trial quality in systematic reviews? Empirical study.
    29. (2007). No. 1 Pemetrexed disodium for the treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma: a systematic review and economic
    30. (2005). No. 1 Randomised controlled multiple treatment comparison to provide a costeffectiveness rationale for the selection of antimicrobial therapy in acne.
    31. On the bias produced 278. by quality scores in meta-analysis, and a hierarchial view of proposed solutions. doi
    32. Professor of Psychiatry, Division of Health in the Community,
    33. (1999). Prospective randomized comparison of high energy transurethral microwave thermotherapy versus alpha-blocker treatment of patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia. doi
    34. Review of guidelines for good practice in decision-analytic modelling in health technology assessment. doi
    35. Systematic reviews 279. in health care: assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials. doi
    36. Targeted transurethral microwave thermotherapy versus alpha-blockade in benign prostatic hyperplasia: outcomes at 18 months. Urology 2001;57:66–70. Bouchier-Hayes DM, Anderson P, Van Appledom 289. doi
    37. (2006). The clinical and cost-effectiveness of donepezil, rivastigmine, galantamine and memantine for Alzheimer’s
    38. The valuation of the international prostate symptom score (IPSS) for use in economic evaluations. doi
    39. (2004). What is the best imaging strategy for acute stroke? By

    To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.