2SPD-003 Magnetic double pigtail stent: an economically interesting innovative device?

Abstract

BackgroundStandard Double Pigtail Stents (DPS) are commonly sterilisable medical devices (SMD). Their removal includes a flexible endoscope for male patients and a cystoscope for female ones. They are therefore removed by the surgeon and nurse. As this procedure may be painful for patients and often not easy to use, the Magnetic Black Star Kit (MBSK) was developed. It is composed of a DPS fitted with a magnet, a guide wire and a magnetic recovery system. This new device highlights a faster removal by a nurse only.PurposeThe aim of the study is to evaluate the cost of standard DPS and their removal in order to determine if MBSK could be economically viable.Material and methodsFor standard ablations, the average cost of staff is calculated according to the time spent on the procedure taking into account the surgeon’s and the nurse’s wages. Costs credited to SMD are determined by purchase or depreciation prices, disinfection, sterilisation and repairing costs. Then, costs of each single used medical devices (SUMD) required for the procedure are collected. Total costs for males and females are compared to costs associated with MBSK (including kit price and cost of its DPS removal procedure). Identical costs for both methods have not been considered.ResultsFor the ablation of DPS in males, the average cost of staff is €20 depending on procedure times. The cost of SMD rises to €85 due to the outsourcing of the sterilisation unit and the disinfection of the endoscope. SUMD cost €69. The total cost of a DPS and its classical removal in males is therefore €174. In females, the total cost is €137, with €12 for staff costs, €56 to the SMD and €69 to the SUMD. On the other side, the total cost of MBSK is €115, with €112 for the kit price and €3 for the procedure, according to feedback. All things considered, reductions in the cost reach 35% for males and 15% for females compared to the classical method.ConclusionUsing MBSK will be economically viable at the hospital and will avoid the use of fragile devices such as endoscopes.No conflict of interest

The “ins and outs” of the magnetic ureteral stent: A novel innovation in Endourology

“…[4][5][6][7][8][9][10]13,14] These 9 studies included 3 retrospective studies, [5,9,10] 3 randomized control trials, [4,8,14] 2 prospective studies, [6,13] and 1 case-control study. [7] The 8 excluded articles consisted of 3 ongoing clinical trials, [15][16][17] 1 case report, [18] 1 cost evaluation, [19] 2 papers were updated pilot studies from the same authors, [20,21] and 1 conference abstract [22] (Table 1).…”