Comparison of Costs, Re-Intervention Rates, and Length of Hospital Stay for Three Uterus Sparing Interventions for Uterine Fibroids: A 2-Year Retrospective Claims Analysis.

PURPOSE

To describe two-year post-operative outcomes, and healthcare utilization of three uterus-sparing interventions used to treat women with intramural and/or subserosal uterine fibroids.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

This was a post-market, randomized, prospective, multi-center, longitudinal, interventional, and comparative clinical study to evaluate the costs and health outcomes of LAP-RFA vs the standard uterine conserving technologies (myomectomy and UAE) for the treatment of symptomatic uterine fibroids in women who desire uterine conservation. For this RCT study, 54 subjects were randomized on a 1:1 ratio across the three procedures and followed out to two years. Their results were compared to retrospective US insurance claims from the IBM MarketScan Commercial Database from 2017-2020 for 96,854 women who underwent a uterus-sparing procedure for fibroids.

RESULTS

Mean ambulatory surgical center costs and the mean out-patient hospital costs were lowest for LAP-RFA ($13,134 and $14,428) and highest for UAE ($28,214 and $19,131). The total two-year re-intervention rate of any subsequent procedure (AM, LM, LAP-RFA, or UAE) was lowest in AM group (0%) followed by LM (4.2%), LAP-RFA (11%), and UAE (33%). Mean peri-operative reintervention costs and the mean reintervention total costs were $2429 and $5939 for LAP-RFA, $2122 and $8368 for LM, $4410 and $11,942 for AM, and $8113 and $46,692 for UAE subjects. In the RCT study, the average length of hospital stay was significantly less for the LAP-RFA group subjects (8.2 hours) in contrast to both the laparoscopic myomectomy group subjects (16.0 hours) and the abdominal myomectomy group subjects (33.6 hours). Despite the small numbers, two-year reintervention rates followed a similar pattern as the IBM MarketScan data.

CONCLUSION

In comparing these three non-invasive approaches, LAP-RFA was associated with the lowest peri-operative cost, and UAE was associated with the highest peri-operative cost. Further studies are needed to assess the cost, effectiveness, and subject satisfaction with each procedure.