Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Renalof® versus Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy (ESWL) for the Treatment of Kidney Stones ≤ 1 cm in Nicaragua  

作　　者：Mélida M. Aguilar Chamorro Sergio Vargas Collado Leslie Pérez Ruíz David Márquez Soriano Jorge Luis Soriano García Mélida M. Aguilar Chamorro;Sergio Vargas Collado;Leslie Pérez Ruíz;David Márquez Soriano;Jorge Luis Soriano García(Clínica Senior, Managua, Nicaragua;Centro de Inmunología Molecular, Havana, Cuba;Catalysis S.L., Madrid, Spain)

机构地区：[1]Clínica Senior, Managua, Nicaragua [2]Centro de Inmunología Molecular, Havana, Cuba [3]Catalysis S.L., Madrid, Spain

出　　处：《Health》2024年第7期674-687,共14页健康（英文）

摘　　要：Objectives: To assess the efficiency in terms of cost-effectiveness (CE) of oral Renalof® treatment versus extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) in the treatment of kidney stones ≤ 1 cm in Nicaragua. Methods: A cost-effectiveness economic evaluation was carried out based on the results obtained in the randomised, prospective, observational, single-blind, prospective, phase 2 clinical trial. Cost-effectiveness and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were calculated. Economic data were obtained from the Economics Department of Clínica Senior in Managua, Nicaragua. The monetary cost was expressed in US dollars (USD). Results: Treatment with Renalof® yielded a CE of $1,323.08/% remission, while ESWL was $9,498.54/% remission. The ICER shows that, in order to achieve a high percentage of kidney stone remission with ESWL, an extra $4,734.70 per patient must be invested. Conclusions: The use of Renalof® is shown to be a more cost-effective option than ESWL. It is recommended for the treatment of kidney stones ≤ 1 cm in size.Objectives: To assess the efficiency in terms of cost-effectiveness (CE) of oral Renalof® treatment versus extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) in the treatment of kidney stones ≤ 1 cm in Nicaragua. Methods: A cost-effectiveness economic evaluation was carried out based on the results obtained in the randomised, prospective, observational, single-blind, prospective, phase 2 clinical trial. Cost-effectiveness and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) were calculated. Economic data were obtained from the Economics Department of Clínica Senior in Managua, Nicaragua. The monetary cost was expressed in US dollars (USD). Results: Treatment with Renalof® yielded a CE of $1,323.08/% remission, while ESWL was $9,498.54/% remission. The ICER shows that, in order to achieve a high percentage of kidney stone remission with ESWL, an extra $4,734.70 per patient must be invested. Conclusions: The use of Renalof® is shown to be a more cost-effective option than ESWL. It is recommended for the treatment of kidney stones ≤ 1 cm in size.

关 键 词：Economic Evaluation PHARMACOECONOMICS Renalof® Extracorporeal Shockwave Lithotripsy Kidney Stones 

分 类 号：R69[医药卫生—泌尿科学]