Costs of BPH management is increasing dramatically and may represent a
s much as 1% of total National Health Service expenditure. It is impor
tant to offer the patients effeective treatment and to offer the socie
ty cost-effective treatment. The ideal cost-effectiveness or cost-util
ity analysis includes not only evaluation of outcome but also socioeco
nomic and intangible costs (''quality of life'' costs). Studies on eco
nomics of the newer less invasive treatment modalities for BPH such as
transurethral microwave thermotherapy of the prostate (TUMT) are scar
ce. Parameters important in the consideration of economy in TUMT are c
apital and disposable costs, retreatment rate and discount percentage.
More studies are needed to make precise cost estimations for TUMT, bu
t at present, TUMT seems comparable to TURF in cost-effectiveness.