Cost Analysis of Metallic Ureteral Stents with 12 Months of Follow-Up

被引:27
|
作者
Taylor, Eric R. [1 ]
Benson, Aaron D. [1 ]
Schwartz, Bradley F. [1 ]
机构
[1] So Illinois Univ, Div Urol, Springfield, IL USA
关键词
OBSTRUCTION; EXPERIENCE;
D O I
10.1089/end.2011.0481
中图分类号
R5 [内科学]; R69 [泌尿科学(泌尿生殖系疾病)];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Background and Purpose: The metallic ureteral stent was first developed for patients with ureteral obstruction related to malignant disease, but it can be used in all patients needing chronic indwelling ureteral stents, including those with benign disease. The traditional method of polymer stent management often necessitates multiple exchanges per year depending on patient and logistical factors. This has significant direct financial cost and likely a negative effect on patients' overall health. The objective was to analyze and compare the costs associated with chronic indwelling metal and silicone-based ureteral stents. Patients and Methods: A prospective database of patients undergoing metal stent placement from February 2008 to June 2010 was reviewed. Mean charges for a single traditional nonmetal and metal stent insertion were calculated. Charges were based on direct hospital charges related to stent cost and surgery. Cost data were based on the fiscal year 2010 cost for polymer or metal stent insertions. Results: Twenty-one patients underwent metal stent placement at our institution. Of these, three traditional stent placements were omitted from analysis because of bundled charges for ureteroscopy at the same setting. Mean charges per single traditional and metal stent placement were $6072.75 and $9469.50, respectively. The estimated annual charges for traditional stents (3-6 exchanges) would be $18,218.25 to $36,436.50. Compared with metal stents, this is a potential financial savings of 48% to 74%. The mean direct cost to patients was 21.6% and 25.4% of the charges for metal and polymer stents, respectively. No patient needed early discontinuation of his or her metal stent because of lower urinatry tract symptoms or gross hematuria. Conclusions: Metal stents are well tolerated by patients with ureteral obstruction of various etiologies and provide a significant financial benefit compared with polymer ureteral stents. For patients who are not fit for surgical intervention regarding their ureteral occlusive disease, the metal Resonance stent is a financially advantageous and well-tolerated option.
引用
收藏
页码:917 / 921
页数:5
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Long-Term Follow-Up after Ureteral Reimplantation in Children: A 12-Year Analysis
    Gerwinn, T.
    Zellner, M.
    Prouza, A.
    Kennedy, U.
    Horst, M.
    Mazzone, L.
    BRITISH JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2024, 111
  • [22] Long-term follow-up after ureteral reimplantation in children: a 12-year analysis
    Gerwinn, T.
    Zellner, M.
    Prouza, A.
    Kennedy, U.
    Horst, M.
    Mazzone, L.
    PEDIATRIC SURGERY INTERNATIONAL, 2025, 41 (01)
  • [23] Self-expandable metallic stents in the palliation of rectosigmoidal carcinoma: a follow-up study
    Tack, J
    Gevers, AM
    Rutgeerts, P
    GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 1998, 48 (03) : 267 - 271
  • [24] Metallic ureteral stents: a cost effective management in malignant ureteric obstruction
    Yuen, S. K. K.
    Ho, B.
    Ma, W. K.
    Yiu, M. K.
    BJU INTERNATIONAL, 2015, 115 : 3 - 4
  • [25] Follow-up of persons with neurologic diseases (FOUND): Up to 46 months follow-up
    Tanner, CM
    MOVEMENT DISORDERS, 2006, 21 : S127 - S127
  • [26] Follow-up after curative treatment for colorectal cancer: longitudinal evaluation of patient initiated follow-up in the first 12 months
    Batehup, L.
    Porter, K.
    Gage, H.
    Williams, P.
    Simmonds, P.
    Lowson, E.
    Dodson, L.
    Davies, N. J.
    Wagland, R.
    Winter, J. D.
    Richardson, A.
    Turner, A.
    Corner, J. L.
    SUPPORTIVE CARE IN CANCER, 2017, 25 (07) : 2063 - 2073
  • [27] Follow-up after curative treatment for colorectal cancer: longitudinal evaluation of patient initiated follow-up in the first 12 months
    L. Batehup
    K. Porter
    H. Gage
    P. Williams
    P. Simmonds
    E. Lowson
    L. Dodson
    N. J. Davies
    R. Wagland
    J. D. Winter
    A. Richardson
    A. Turner
    J. L. Corner
    Supportive Care in Cancer, 2017, 25 : 2063 - 2073
  • [28] Distal Ureteral Calculi: US Follow-up
    Moesbergen, Todd C.
    de Ryke, Rex J.
    Dunbar, Sally
    Wells, J. Elisabeth
    Anderson, Nigel G.
    RADIOLOGY, 2011, 260 (02) : 575 - 580
  • [29] URETERAL PERFORATION IN URETERORENOSCOPY - MANAGEMENT AND FOLLOW-UP
    HIENERT, G
    LATAL, D
    ZEITSCHRIFT FUR UROLOGIE UND NEPHROLOGIE, 1989, 82 (09): : 455 - 457
  • [30] Management and follow-up of impacted ureteral stones
    Deliveliotis, C
    Chrisofos, M
    Albanis, S
    Serafetinides, E
    Varkarakis, J
    Protogerou, V
    UROLOGIA INTERNATIONALIS, 2003, 70 (04) : 269 - 272