BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare laparoscopic colposuspension with tension-free vaginal tape (TVT) in terms of costs to the county. METHODS: In a prospective, randomized study, we approached 270 consecutive women presenting for evaluation of stress urinary incontinence symptoms at one university hospital. Preoperatively, and at 1-year follow-up, the women underwent urodynamic evaluation, an ultra-short pad-test and completed a lower urinary tract symptoms questionnaire. We randomized 79 consenting, eligible women to either procedure; a 1-year follow-up examination was performed on 68/71 (96%) women that were available. The procedures were performed as described previously. Main outcome measures were all relevant costs for goods and services associated with the procedures. RESULTS: The baseline characteristics of the two groups were similar. The TVT procedure was performed significantly faster than the laparoscopic colposuspension, i.e. 44.9 +/- 14.2 min compared with 60.5 +/- 13.4 min (p < 0.0001). Even so, procedural costs were significantly lower for laparoscopic colposuspension than for TVT (euro 1273.4 compared with euro 1342.8 p < 0.001). At the 1-year follow-up visit, three women operated on with TVT and one operated on with laparoscopic colposuspension required re-operation for continuous stress urinary incontinence. One women operated on with TVT had her sling cut for bladder-emptying problems. Total costs, including re-operations were euro 1462.6 for a TVT procedure andeuro; 1314.5 for a laparoscopic colposuspension. CONCLUSION: In our hands, the laparoscopic colposuspension was less expensive to the county than the TVT procedure.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare laparoscopic colposuspension with tension-free vaginal tape (TVT) in terms of costs to the county. METHODS: In a prospective, randomized study, we approached 270 consecutive women presenting for evaluation of stress urinary incontinence symptoms at one university hospital. Preoperatively, and at 1-year follow-up, the women underwent urodynamic evaluation, an ultra-short pad-test and completed a lower urinary tract symptoms questionnaire. We randomized 79 consenting, eligible women to either procedure; a 1-year follow-up examination was performed on 68/71 (96%) women that were available. The procedures were performed as described previously. Main outcome measures were all relevant costs for goods and services associated with the procedures. RESULTS: The baseline characteristics of the two groups were similar. The TVT procedure was performed significantly faster than the laparoscopic colposuspension, i.e. 44.9 +/- 14.2 min compared with 60.5 +/- 13.4 min (p < 0.0001). Even so, procedural costs were significantly lower for laparoscopic colposuspension than for TVT (euro 1273.4 compared with euro 1342.8 p < 0.001). At the 1-year follow-up visit, three women operated on with TVT and one operated on with laparoscopic colposuspension required re-operation for continuous stress urinary incontinence. One women operated on with TVT had her sling cut for bladder-emptying problems. Total costs, including re-operations were euro 1462.6 for a TVT procedure andeuro; 1314.5 for a laparoscopic colposuspension. CONCLUSION: In our hands, the laparoscopic colposuspension was less expensive to the county than the TVT procedure.