A maturing baby boomer generation that is more open to testing for conditions of the prostate is contributing to a rise in the number of cases of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). This demographic group is demanding treatment of BPH using newer minimally invasive technologies that are both safe and effective.

New analysis from Frost & Sullivan (http://www.medicaldevices.frost.com), U.S. Benign Prostatic Hyperplasia Therapeutic Devices Market, reveals that the market earned revenues of $141.0 million in 2005 and estimates this to reach $282.8 million in 2012.

Minimally invasive BPH treatment modalities are slowly nudging out the traditional therapy option, transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP). Patients are increasingly looking for alternatives to TURP, since the procedure is expensive, requires lengthy post-operative hospitalization, and is associated with sexual dysfunction, such as impotence or retrograde ejaculation, in up to 90 percent of cases.

“As the number of men over the age of 40 continues to grow rapidly, the demand for safe and effective treatment for BPH will rise significantly,” notes Frost & Sullivan Research Analyst Shantayan Panda. “While prostate removal has been the gold standard for decades, the availability of treatment modalities which are associated with minimal sexual side effects will lead to a shift in the market away from prostate resection.”

However, manufacturers of the newer devices will have to offer more retrospective data, highlighting the greater long-term viability and lowered incidence of side effects, to convince urologists to incorporate these procedures in their practices. In addition, manufacturers must attract the attention of physicians and hospital administrators prior to and immediately after the launch of the device. This will help them to delineate the comparative advantages their product has over substitutes, and provides an early-mover advantage.

“Due to the lack of long-term data regarding the clinical efficacy of these modalities, urologists are deterred from doing away with TURP,” notes Panda. “To generate interest, manufacturers should allow key end-user groups to test these new devices in real-world clinical settings. By using the feedback obtained from this exercise, market participants can also refine their devices to better suit physicians’ needs, providing a significant advantage over competitors’ products.”

In addition, the ability to provide solid data regarding the effectiveness of the device increases the likelihood of favorable reimbursement by both government and private insurers. Until the payment rates for these procedures stabilize and the solvency of government payers is less jeopardized, the embracing of these treatment options will be subdued.

“This potential reimbursement quagmire makes it unlikely that TURP will be completely dropped from the urologist’s arsenal in the near future,” notes Panda. “Nonetheless, by providing as much supporting data as possible, companies can have a direct positive impact on reimbursement rates, and consequently their device sales.”