Micro cost-effectiveness analysis of standard vs. mini percutaneous nephrolithotomy A single Canadian institution's experience.

introductionMini-percutaneous nephrolithotomy (mPCNL ) has been described as an alternative to standard nephrolithotomy (sPCNL ) for select stones. Studies suggest that mPCNL has comparable stone-free rates, with potential for decreased complications and shorter hospital stay. Costs associated with both procedures present a challenge to Canadian institutions due to capital acquisitions of equipment and ongoing disposables. The objective of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of both procedures at our institution.

methodsA decision tree analytic model was developed to compare costs and outcomes of both procedures. Primary outcomes included assessment of total capital, operative, and hospitalization costs. Cost and outcome of peri- and postoperative parameters were obtained using a retrospective analysis of 20 mPCNL and 84 sPCNL procedures on 1-2.5 cm stones between January 2020 and June 2022, and supplemented with internal hospital expenditure records and literature outcome data. Descriptive statistics and regression models were performed.

resultsThe estimated total cost-per-patient was $7427.05 and $5036.29 for sPCNL and mPCNL, respectively, resulting in cost-savings of $2390.76 in favor of mPCNL, with a comparable stone-free rate. The savings were due to lower costs associated with complications and hospital stay. mPCNL had higher capital costs ($95 116.00) compared to sPCNL ($78 517.00), but per-procedure operative costs were lower for mPCNL ($2504.48) compared to sPCNL ($3335.72). Cost-per-case regression of total costs intersected at 5.51 cases when accounting for operative and hospitalization costs, and at 20 cases when only considering operative costs.

conclusionsDespite higher upfront costs, mCPNL may represent a valid, cost-effective alternative to sPCNL for select stones due to clinical and economic benefits in Canadian institutions.