Artificial Urinary Sphincters as a Treatment for Post-Prostatectomy Severe Urinary Incontinence in Italy: A Cost-Utility Analysis

Objective: This study aimed at evaluating the cost-utility of artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) in men affected by postprostatectomy severe urinary incontinence and identifying the most cost-effective alternative among the various devices analyzed in Italy.Methods: A 5-year cycles Markov model was developed to simulate the disease evolution. The analysis compared conservative therapy, ZSI 375®, single-cuff (SC) AMS 800TM, and double-cuff (DC) AMS 800TM. A Probabilistic Sensitivity Analysis (PSA) was performed. One thousand Monte Carlo simulations were conducted to generate the Cost-Effectiveness Acceptability Curve for each intervention strategy. A sensitivity analysis on the price of the device was conducted.Results: From the Italian National Health Service perspective, DC AMS 800TM was the most cost-effective alternative in comparison with conservative therapy, with an Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) value equal to € 12,893. From the NHS + patient perspective, both the AMS 800TM devices (SC and DC) were dominant in comparison with conservative therapy. From the societal perspective, ICER was dominant for all the alternatives considered in terms of cost-effectiveness. The PSA showed that DC AMS 800TM had a greater probability to be cost-effective with respect to the other strategies considered in the analysis. The sensitivity analysis on the price of the device showed that in all the cases analyzed the incremental cost per QALY gained would be below € 25,000.Conclusions: This cost-utility analysis confirms that AUSs are cost-effective options in the Italian context with respect to conservative therapy. Among AUSs, DC AMS 800TM has the greatest probability to be cost-effective.