Repeat urethrotomy and dilation for the treatment of urethral stricture are neither clinically effective nor cost-effective.

PURPOSE: We developed an algorithm for the management of urethral stricture based on cost-effectiveness. MATERIALS AND METHODS: United Kingdom medical and hospital costs associated with the current management of urethral stricture were calculated using private medical insurance schedules of reimbursement and clean intermittent self-catheterization supply costs. These costs were applied to 126 new patients treated endoscopically for urethral stricture in a general urological setting between January 1, 1991 and December 31, 1999. Treatment failure was defined as recurrent symptomatic stricture requiring further operative intervention following initial intervention. Mean followup available was 25 months (range 1 to 132). RESULTS: The costs were urethrotomy/urethral dilation 2,250.00 pounds sterling (3,375.00 dollars, ratio 1.00), simple 1-stage urethroplasty 5,015.00 pounds sterling (7,522.50 dollars, ratio 2.23), complex 1-stage urethroplasty 5,335.00 pounds sterling (8,002.50 dollars, ratio 2.37) and 2-stage urethroplasty 10,370 pounds sterling (15,555.00 dollars, ratio 4.61). Of the 126 patients assessed 60 (47.6%) required more than 1 endoscopic retreatments (mean 3.13 each), 50 performed biweekly clean intermittent self-catheterization and 7 underwent urethroplasty during followup. The total cost per patient for all 126 patients for stricture treatment during followup was 6,113 pounds sterling (9,170 dollars). This cost was calculated by multiplying procedure cost by the number of procedures performed. A strategy of urethrotomy or urethral dilation as first line treatment, followed by urethroplasty for recurrence yielded a total cost per patient of 5,866 pounds sterling (8,799 dollars). CONCLUSIONS: A strategy of initial urethrotomy or urethral dilation followed by urethroplasty in patients with recurrent stricture proves to be the most cost-effective strategy. This financially based strategy concurs with evidence based best practice for urethral stricture management.

Advanced prostate cancer. The role of high priced hormone therapy.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the costs of the various options presently available in Australia for treatment of advanced prostatic carcinoma by androgen deprivation. DESIGN: Forty patients underwent a bilateral orchidectomy for prostatic carcinoma during the 1990/91 financial year at the Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane. The Yale Cost Model, as adapted for use in Australian case-mix projects, was used to derive a diagnosis related group (DRG) cost for this procedure. This was compared with the projected cost that would be incurred in treating patients with the various medical alternatives. To enable comparison, expenses were calculated assuming a mean duration of survival of two years. RESULTS: The average cost of a bilateral orchidectomy was $2869. This compared to $11,253 for goserelin and $12,329 for cyproterone acetate when used alone in treating a single patient. Flutamide is presently only approved for combination therapy with a luteinising hormone-releasing hormone agonist, and when used with goserelin an average cost of $16,148 per patient was projected. CONCLUSIONS: Bilateral orchidectomy is clearly the cheapest means of hormone manipulation for prostatic carcinoma. Unless the costs of alternative therapies are drastically reduced in Australia, their use is difficult to justify in other than exceptional circumstances. We believe their use should be restricted presently to patients who would otherwise require a bilateral orchidectomy and have an anticipated survival of less than six months.