Australian Centre for Health Services Innovation (AusHSI) and Centre for Healthcare Transformation, School of Public Health & Social Work, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Australian Centre for Health Services Innovation (AusHSI) and Centre for Healthcare Transformation, School of Public Health & Social Work, Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Urol Oncol. 2025 Jan;43(1):62.e15-62.e26. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2024.09.016. Epub 2024 Oct 4.
Microwave ablation (MWA) has gained attention as a minimally invasive and safe alternative to surgical intervention for patients with small renal masses; however, its cost-effectiveness in Australia remains unclear. This study conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis to evaluate the relative clinical and economic merits of MWA compared to robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy (RA-PN) in the treatment of small renal masses.
A Markov state-transition model was constructed to simulate the progression of Australian patients with small renal masses treated with MWA versus RA-PN over a 10-year horizon. Transition probabilities and utility data were sourced from comprehensive literature reviews, and cost data were estimated from the Australian health system perspective. Life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and lifetime costs were estimated. Modelled uncertainty was assessed using both deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses. A willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold of $50,000 per QALY was adopted. All costs are expressed in 2022 Australian dollars and discounted at 3% annually. To assess the broader applicability of our findings, a validated cost-adaptation method was employed to extend the analysis to 8 other high-income countries.
Both the base case and cost-adaptation analyses revealed that MWA dominated RA-PN, producing both lower costs and greater effectiveness over 10 years. The cost-effectiveness outcome was robust across all model parameters. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses confirmed that MWA was dominant in 98.3% of simulations at the designated WTP threshold, underscoring the reliability of the model under varying assumptions.
For patients with small renal masses in Australia and comparable healthcare settings, MWA is the preferred strategy to maximize health benefits per dollar, making it a highly cost-effective alternative to RA-PN.
微波消融(MWA)作为一种微创且安全的替代手术干预方法,已引起关注,适用于小肾肿瘤患者;然而,其在澳大利亚的成本效益尚不清楚。本研究进行了成本效益分析,以评估 MWA 与机器人辅助部分肾切除术(RA-PN)相比,在治疗小肾肿瘤方面的相对临床和经济优势。
构建了马尔可夫状态转移模型,以模拟澳大利亚小肾肿瘤患者在 10 年时间内接受 MWA 与 RA-PN 治疗的进展情况。转移概率和效用数据源自全面的文献综述,成本数据则根据澳大利亚卫生系统的角度进行估算。估计了寿命年、质量调整寿命年(QALY)和终生成本。使用确定性和概率敏感性分析评估模型不确定性。采用每 QALY 50000 澳元的意愿支付(WTP)阈值。所有成本均以 2022 年澳元表示,并按每年 3%贴现。为评估研究结果的更广泛适用性,采用了经过验证的成本调整方法,将分析扩展到其他 8 个高收入国家。
无论是基础案例还是成本调整分析,均显示 MWA 优于 RA-PN,在 10 年内产生更低的成本和更高的效果。所有模型参数下,成本效益结果均具有稳健性。概率敏感性分析进一步证实,在指定的 WTP 阈值下,MWA 在 98.3%的模拟中占主导地位,这突出了模型在不同假设下的可靠性。
对于澳大利亚和类似医疗保健环境中的小肾肿瘤患者,MWA 是最大化每美元健康效益的首选策略,使其成为 RA-PN 的极具成本效益的替代方案。