Evaluation of Private Payer and Patient Out-of-Pocket Costs Associated With the Surgical Management of Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and compare the financial burden of various surgical interventions for the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). METHODS: We identified commercially insured men with a diagnosis of BPH who underwent a procedure of interest (simple prostatectomy (SP), transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP), holmium laser enucleation of the prostate (HoLEP), photovaporization of the prostate (PVP), prostatic urethral lift (PUL), or water vapor thermal therapy (WVTT)) between 2015 and 2021 with the OptumLabs Data Warehouse. Primary outcome was total health care costs (THC) which included both patient out-of-pocket (OOP) and health plan paid costs for the index procedure and combined follow-up years 1-5. A generalized linear model was used to estimate adjusted costs controlling for demographic and clinical characteristics. Patients undergoing WVTT were excluded from extended follow-up analyses due to limited data. RESULTS: Among 25,407 patients with BPH, 10,117 (40%) underwent TURP, 6353 (25%) underwent PUL, 5411 (21%) underwent PVP, 1319 (5%) underwent SP, 1243 (5%) underwent WVTT, and 964 (4%) underwent HoLEP. Index procedure costs varied significantly with WVTT being the least costly [THC: $2637 (95% confidence interval (CI): $2513-$2761)], and SP being the costliest [THC: $14,423 (95% CI: $12,772-$16,075)]. For aggregate index and 5-year follow-up costs, HoLEP ($31,926 [95% CI: $29,704-$34,148]) was the least costly and PUL ($36,596 [95% CI: $35,369-37,823]) was the costliest. CONCLUSION: BPH surgical treatment is associated with significant system-level health care costs. The level of impact varies between procedures. Minimally invasive options, such as WVTT, may offer initial cost reductions; however, HoLEP and SP are associated with lower follow-up costs.

Contemporary care patterns in the management of small renal masses.

OBJECTIVES: Incidental small renal masses (SRMs) now account for the majority of new diagnoses of renal cancers. Although there are established management guidelines, referral and management patterns can vary. We aimed to explore identification, practice patterns, and management of identified SRMs in an integrated health system. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis. METHODS: We identified patients with a newly diagnosed SRM measuring 3 cm or less from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2017, at Kaiser Permanente Southern California. These patients were flagged at the time of radiographic identification to ensure adequate notification of findings. Diagnostic modality, referral, and treatment patterns were analyzed. RESULTS: Of 519 patients with SRMs, 65% were found on abdominal CT and 22% on renal/abdominal ultrasounds. Within 6 months, 70% of patients consulted with a urologist. Initial management patterns were as follows: active surveillance (60%), partial/radical nephrectomy (18%), and ablation (4%). Among 312 patients on surveillance, 14% eventually received treatment. The majority of patients (69.4%) did not receive guideline-recommended chest imaging for initial staging. Urologist visit within 6 months of SRM diagnosis was associated with increased adherence to staging (P = .003) and subsequent surveillance imaging (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: In this contemporary analysis of an integrated health system's experience, referral to a urologist was associated with guideline-concordant staging and surveillance imaging. Frequent utilization of active surveillance with a low rate of progression to active treatment was noted in both groups. These findings shed light on care patterns upstream of urologic evaluation and support the need for clinical pathways to be implemented at the time of radiologic diagnosis.

Vesicourethral Anastomotic Stenosis Following Radical Prostatectomy: Risk Factors, Natural History, and Treatment Outcomes.

PURPOSE: Vesicourethral anastomotic stenosis after radical prostatectomy is a complication with significant adverse quality-of-life implications. Herein, we identify groups at risk for vesicourethral anastomotic stenosis and further characterize the natural history and treatment patterns. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Years 1987-2013 of a prospectively maintained radical prostatectomy registry were queried for patients with the diagnosis of vesicourethral anastomotic stenosis, defined as symptomatic and inability to pass a 17F cystoscope. Patients with follow-up less than 1 year, preoperative anterior urethral stricture, transurethral resection of prostate, prior pelvic radiotherapy, and metastatic disease were excluded. Logistic regression was performed to identify predictors of vesicourethral anastomotic stenosis. Functional outcomes were characterized. RESULTS: Out of 17,904 men, 851 (4.8%) developed vesicourethral anastomotic stenosis at a median of 3.4 months. Multivariable logistic regression identified associations with vesicourethral anastomotic stenosis including adjuvant radiation, BMI, prostate volume, urine leak, blood transfusion, and nonnerve-sparing techniques. Robotic approach (OR 0.39, P < .01) and complete nerve sparing (OR 0.63, P < .01) were associated with reduced vesicourethral anastomotic stenosis formation. Vesicourethral anastomotic stenosis was independently associated with 1 or more incontinence pads/d at 1 year (OR 1.76, P < .001). Of the patients treated for vesicourethral anastomotic stenosis, 82% underwent endoscopic dilation. The 1- and 5-year vesicourethral anastomotic stenosis retreatment rates were 34% and 42%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Patient-related factors, surgical technique, and perioperative morbidity influence the risk of vesicourethral anastomotic stenosis after radical prostatectomy. Ultimately, vesicourethral anastomotic stenosis is independently associated with increased risk of urinary incontinence. Endoscopic management is temporizing for most men, with a high rate of retreatment by 5 years.

Evaluation of the Cost-Effectiveness of Surgical Treatment Options for Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the cost-effectiveness of surgical interventions for BPH. METHODS: Using a Markov model, a cost-utility analysis was performed comparing HoLEP, B-TURP, WVTT, and PUL for prostate size <80cc (index patient 1) and HoLEP and SP for prostate size >80cc (index patient 2). Model probabilities and utility values were drawn from the literature. Analysis was performed at a 5-year time horizon with extrapolation to a lifetime horizon. Primary outcomes included quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), 2021 Medicare costs, and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) with a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: At 5 years, costs per patient for index patient 1 were $3292 (WVTT), $6532 (HoLEP), $6670 (B-TURP), and $10,257 (PUL). HoLEP resulted in the highest QALYs (4.66), followed by B-TURP (4.60), PUL (4.38), and WVTT (4.38). This translated to HoLEP being most cost-effective (ICER $11,847). For index patient 2, HoLEP was less costly ($6,585 vs $15,404) and more effective (4.654 vs 4.650) relative to SP. On sensitivity analysis for index patient 1, B-TURP became most cost-effective if cost of HoLEP increased two-fold or chronic stress incontinence following HoLEP increased ten-fold. When follow-up time was varied, WVTT was preferred at very short follow up (<1 year), and HoLEP became more strongly preferred with longer follow up. CONCLUSION: At 5 years follow up, HoLEP is a cost-effective surgical treatment for BPH- independent of gland size.

Development and Validation of a Clinical Prognostic Stage Group System for Nonmetastatic Prostate Cancer Using Disease-Specific Mortality Results From the International Staging Collaboration for Cancer of the Prostate.

Importance: In 2016, the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) established criteria to evaluate prediction models for staging. No localized prostate cancer models were endorsed by the Precision Medicine Core committee, and 8th edition staging was based on expert consensus. Objective: To develop and validate a pretreatment clinical prognostic stage group system for nonmetastatic prostate cancer. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multinational cohort study included 7 centers from the United States, Canada, and Europe, the Shared Equal Access Regional Cancer Hospital (SEARCH) Veterans Affairs Medical Centers collaborative (5 centers), and the Cancer of the Prostate Strategic Urologic Research Endeavor (CaPSURE) registry (43 centers) (the STAR-CAP cohort). Patients with cT1-4N0-1M0 prostate adenocarcinoma treated from January 1, 1992, to December 31, 2013 (follow-up completed December 31, 2017). The STAR-CAP cohort was randomly divided into training and validation data sets; statisticians were blinded to the validation data until the model was locked. A Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) cohort was used as a second validation set. Analysis was performed from January 1, 2018, to November 30, 2019. Exposures: Curative intent radical prostatectomy (RP) or radiotherapy with or without androgen deprivation therapy. Main Outcomes and Measures: Prostate cancer-specific mortality (PCSM). Based on a competing-risk regression model, a points-based Score staging system was developed. Model discrimination (C index), calibration, and overall performance were assessed in the validation cohorts. Results: Of 19 684 patients included in the analysis (median age, 64.0 [interquartile range (IQR), 59.0-70.0] years), 12 421 were treated with RP and 7263 with radiotherapy. Median follow-up was 71.8 (IQR, 34.3-124.3) months; 4078 (20.7%) were followed up for at least 10 years. Age, T category, N category, Gleason grade, pretreatment serum prostate-specific antigen level, and the percentage of positive core biopsy results among biopsies performed were included as variables. In the validation set, predicted 10-year PCSM for the 9 Score groups ranged from 0.3% to 40.0%. The 10-year C index (0.796; 95% CI, 0.760-0.828) exceeded that of the AJCC 8th edition (0.757; 95% CI, 0.719-0.792), which was improved across age, race, and treatment modality and within the SEER validation cohort. The Score system performed similarly to individualized random survival forest and interaction models and outperformed National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) and Cancer of the Prostate Risk Assessment (CAPRA) risk grouping 3- and 4-tier classification systems (10-year C index for NCCN 3-tier, 0.729; for NCCN 4-tier, 0.746; for Score, 0.794) as well as CAPRA (10-year C index for CAPRA, 0.760; for Score, 0.782). Conclusions and Relevance: Using a large, diverse international cohort treated with standard curative treatment options, a proposed AJCC-compliant clinical prognostic stage group system for prostate cancer has been developed. This system may allow consistency of reporting and interpretation of results and clinical trial design.

Predicting Patients with Inadequate 24- or 48-Hour Urine Collections at Time of Metabolic Stone Evaluation.

PURPOSE: We aimed to understand the characteristics of patients who are less likely to submit adequate urine collections at metabolic stone evaluation. METHODS: Inadequate urine collection was defined using two definitions: (1) Reference ranges for 24-hour creatinine/kilogram (Cr/24) and (2) discrepancy in total 24-hour urine Cr between 24-hour urine collections. There were 1502 patients with ≥1 kidney stone between 1998 and 2014 who performed a 24- or 48-hour urine collection at Northwestern Memorial Hospital and who were identified retrospectively. Multivariate analysis was performed to analyze predictor variables for adequate urine collection. RESULTS: A total of 2852 urine collections were analyzed. Mean age for males was 54.4 years (range 17-86), and for females was 50.2 years (range 8-90). One patient in the study was younger than 17 years old. (1) Analysis based on the Cr 24/kg definition: There were 50.7% of patients who supplied an inadequate sample. Females were nearly 50% less likely to supply an adequate sample compared with men, P<0.001. Diabetes (odds ratio [OR] 1.42 [1.04-1.94], P=0.026) and vitamin D supplementation (OR 0.64 [0.43-0.95], P=0.028) predicted receiving an adequate/inadequate sample, respectively. (2) Analysis based on differences between total urinary Cr: The model was stratified based on percentage differences between samples up to 50%. At 10%, 20%, 30%, 40%, and 50% differences, inadequate collections were achieved in 82.8%, 66.9%, 51.7%, 38.5%, and 26.4% of patients, respectively. Statistical significance was observed based on differences of ≥40%, and this was defined as the threshold for an inadequate sample. Female sex (OR 0.73 [0.54-0.98], P=0.037) predicted supplying inadequate samples. Adequate collections were more likely to be received on a Sunday (OR 1.6 [1.03-2.58], P=0.038) and by sedentary workers (OR 2.3 [1.12-4.72], P=0.023). CONCLUSION: Urine collections from patients during metabolic evaluation for nephrolithiasis may be considered inadequate based on two commonly used clinical definitions. This may have therapeutic or economic ramifications and the propensity for females to supply inadequate samples should be investigated further.

The men's health center: Disparities in gender specific health services among the top 50 "best hospitals" in America.

OBJECTIVE: Gender-specific integrated health services have long existed in the arena of women's health care, but men's health centers (MHCs) have only recently emerged as a novel practice model. Here, we seek to evaluate the prevalence and format of MHCs found in the leading academic medical centers in the United States. METHODS: The US News & World Report's Top 50 Ranked Hospitals for Urology was used as our cohort. Data were gathered on the presence of MHCs and types of providers and conditions treated. An equivalent search was performed for women's health centers (WHCs). RESULTS: Sixteen of 50 (32%) promoted some type of MHC, compared to 49 of 50 (98%) offering a WHC. Eight of the top 15 ranked institutions (53%) had an MHC compared to eight of 35 (23%) remaining programs. Six of 16 MHCs incorporated providers from a variety of medical disciplines, including urologists, internists, endocrinologists, cardiologists, and psychologists, while another six of 16 MHCs were staffed solely by urologists. Eight of 16 provided services for exclusively urologic issues, four of 16 offered additional services in treatment of other medical conditions, and four of 16 did not specify. CONCLUSION: A considerable disparity exists between the prevalence of gender-specific health services, with WHCs being much more numerous than MHCs. All but one leading institution had WHCs compared to less than one-third having MHCs. Our findings also highlight the heterogeneous nature of men's health programs, as they exhibit great variability in program type and focus, yet are all being marketed under the "Men's Health" banner.