Number №3, 2019 - page 12-18

Medical and economic rationale for the use of modern methods of treating urolithiasis DOI: 10.29188/2222-8543-2019-11-3-12-18

Protoschak V.V., Paronnikov M.V., Orlov D.N., Kiselev A.O.
Information about authors:
  • Protoshchak V.V. – Dc. Sc., Professor, Chief Urologist of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, Head of the Department of Urology of the Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Education «S.M. Military Medical Academy Kirova» of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, St. Petersburg, protoshakurology@mail.ru
  • Paronnikov M.V. – PhD, Head of the Department of Urolithotripsy of the Clinic of Urology of the Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Education «S.M. Military Medical Academy Kirova» of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, St. Petersburg, paronnikov@mail.ru
  • Orlov D.N. – urologist, medical service of the Western Military District of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, St. Petersburg
  • Kiselev A.O. – urologist, clinic of urology of the Federal State Budgetary Educational Institution of Higher Education «S.M. Military Medical Academy Kirova» of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, St. Petersburg
246

Contacts: Protoshchak Vladimir Vladimirovich, protoshakurology@mail.ru

Relevance: Over the past decades, the incidence of urolithiasis has been steadily increasing, and the development of technology has led to the emergence of new methods of treating the disease. In the face of ever-increasing economic costs, information on the cost-effectiveness of various treatment options for urolithiasis is becoming increasingly relevant.

Purpose: to analyze a review of modern publications on the clinical and economic effectiveness of modern methods of treatment of urolithiasis.

Material and methods: based on economic efficiency, the article considers both drug treatment of urolithiasis lithokinetic, litholytic therapy and metaphylaxis, and surgical methods – shock wave lithotripsy, contact ureterolithotripsy, retrograde intrarenal surgery, percutaneous nephrolithotomy.

Results: In general, lithokinetic therapy is a cost-effective method of treating urolithiasis in the absence of the need for surgical treatment. The clinical efficacy of oral chemolysis has been studied sufficiently, but we have not found any economic justification in the literature. Percutaneous nephrolithotomy is one of the most expensive surgical treatment methods for urolithiasis, along with shock wave lithotripsy, contact ureterolithotripsy and retrograde intrarenal surgery, and the economic effect directly depends on the expected clinical outcome.

Conclusion: Medical treatment of the urolithiasis performed for medical condition is economically feasible. ?e emergence and introduction into clinical practice of the latest equipment for percutaneous, transurethral surgical interventions, the high cost of medical supplies is expensive.

AttachmentSize
Download253.83 KB
urolithiasis, clinical and economic analysis, economic justification, clinical efficacy, lithokinetic therapy, litholytic therapy, metaphylaxis, shock wave lithotripsy, contact ureterolithotripsy, retrograde intrarenal surgery, percutaneous nephrolithotomy

Readera - Социальная платформа публикаций

Crossref makes research outputs easy to find, cite, link, and assess