OBJECTIVES: Benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is one of the most common urological diseases among ageing men, and, within the context of an increasingly ageing population, healthcare systems and societies face a considerable and growing burden associated with managing the condition. Despite the advancement of minimally invasive surgical therapies, transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) remains the gold standard for the surgical treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) associated with BPH for patients either failing or refusing medical therapy. The aim of this study was to estimate the cost and resource impact of adopting a temporary implantable nitinol device (iTind) as an alternative to TURP for eligible patients in Spain.

METHODS: A budget impact model which adopts a decision analytic framework was developed. The model was based on a 2018 cohort of 1,195 patients identified from a Spanish national hospital database diagnosed as having BPH with LUTS. A Spanish National Health System perspective, comparing two scenarios, was modeled; a reference case where all patients received either bipolar or monopolar TURP, and an assumed scenario where a proportion of eligible patients received iTind.

RESULTS: The calculated direct costs of TURP and iTind procedures in Spain were 3,780 EUR and 2,739 EUR, respectively. Treating 7.5% (90) of patients with iTind rather than TURP led to a 93,260 EUR (2.1%) reduction in the total cost of care for this cohort of Spanish BPH patients. In terms of resource utilization, 67 hours of operating room time, 488 hours of healthcare professional (urologists, anesthesiologists, nurses, and support staff) time, and 345 post-operative hospital bed days were saved in the scenario with iTind (4.5%, 5.3%, and 7.5% reductions, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS: This analysis demonstrates that adopting iTind in clinical practice for eligible Spanish patients is a cost- and resource-saving approach to managing LUTS associated with BPH.