Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2012 Jul;101(7):573-84.
doi: 10.1007/s00392-012-0428-2. Epub 2012 Feb 21.

Cost-effectiveness of paclitaxel-coated balloon angioplasty and paclitaxel-eluting stent implantation for treatment of coronary in-stent restenosis in patients with stable coronary artery disease

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Cost-effectiveness of paclitaxel-coated balloon angioplasty and paclitaxel-eluting stent implantation for treatment of coronary in-stent restenosis in patients with stable coronary artery disease

Klaus Bonaventura et al. Clin Res Cardiol. 2012 Jul.

Abstract

Background: Recent studies have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of drug-coated balloon (DCB) angioplasty for the treatment of coronary in-stent restenosis (ISR). The cost-effectiveness of this practice is unknown.

Methods: A Markov state-transition decision analytic model accounting for varying procedural efficacy rates, complication rates, and cost estimates was developed to compare DCB angioplasty with drug-eluting stent (DES) placement in patients with bare-metal stent (BMS)-ISR. Data on procedural outcomes associated with both treatment strategies were derived from the literature, and the cost analysis was conducted from a health care payer perspective. Effectiveness was expressed as life-years gained.

Results: In the base-case analysis, initial procedure costs amounted to €3,604.14 for DCB angioplasty and to €3,309.66 for DES implantation. Over a 12-month time horizon, the DCB strategy was found to be less costly (€4,130.38 vs. €5,305.30) and slightly more effective in terms of life expectancy (0.983 vs. 0.976 years) than the DES strategy. Extensive sensitivity analyses indicated that, in comparison with DES implantation, the cost advantage of the DCB strategy was robust to clinically plausible variations in the values of key model input parameters. The variables with the greatest impact on base-case results were the duration of dual antiplatelet therapy with acetylsalicylic acid and clopidogrel after DCB angioplasty, the use of generic clopidogrel, and variations in the costs associated with the DCB device.

Conclusion: DCB angioplasty is a cost-effective treatment option for coronary BMS-ISR. The higher initial costs of DCB are more than offset by later cost-savings, predominantly as a result of reduced medication costs.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Am J Cardiol. 2012 Jan 1;109(1):47-52 - PubMed
    1. Clin Res Cardiol. 2011 Mar;100(3):191-200 - PubMed
    1. N Engl J Med. 2006 Nov 16;355(20):2113-24 - PubMed
    1. Minerva Cardioangiol. 2010 Oct;58(5):583-8 - PubMed
    1. Ann Thorac Surg. 2009 Jun;87(6):1828-38 - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources