Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ASCO Annual Meeting 2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

2024 ASCO Annual Meeting

Keep up to date with all the top stories and latest evidence with our hub page, including official congress videos and expert takeaways.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
PharmacoEconomics
Published in: PharmacoEconomics 4/2009

01-04-2009 | Original Research Article

Cost Effectiveness of Drug-Eluting Stents In Belgian Practice

Healthcare Payer Perspective

Authors: Dr Mattias Neyt, Chris De Laet, Annemieke De Ridder, Hans Van Brabandt

Published in: PharmacoEconomics | Issue 4/2009

Login to get access

Abstract

Background: There has been a steep increase in the number of percutaneous coronary intervention procedures performed for coronary heart disease since their introduction about 30 years ago. Recently, the use of drug-eluting stents (DES) compared with the original bare metal stents (BMS) has increased in many countries.
Objective: To assess the cost effectiveness of DES versus BMS in a real-world setting from the Belgian healthcare payer perspective.
Methods: We developed a decision analysis model to estimate incremental costs (year 2004 or 2007 values [depending on the underlying variable]) and effectiveness. Incremental effectiveness was calculated by combining relative benefits from published meta-analyses with real-world observations from a Belgian registry. Probabilistic modelling and sensitivity analyses were performed. The model had a 1-year time horizon. Sixteen sub groups were created based on the following characteristics: initial stent type, diabetic status, complex lesion and multi-vessel disease. Scenario analyses were performed for the influence on reinterventions and the duration of clopidogrel use. In each analysis, 1000 Monte Carlo simulations were performed.
Results: The incremental costs for switching from BMS to DES are substantial (approximately €1000), while the benefits, expressed as QALYs, are extremely small (on average <0.001 QALYs gained). This led to very high incremental cost-effectiveness ratios: over €860 000 per QALY gained in all subgroups and scenario analyses.
Conclusion: Comparing DES with BMS, no life-years are gained and small quality-of-life improvements are achieved for short periods, resulting in a high likelihood that DES are not cost effective. When there is competition for scarce resources this should be considered when deciding on the reimbursement of this technology.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Footnotes
1
In Belgium, reimbursement does not cover the full cost of the service. The out-of-pocket payments for individuals consist of two parts. The difference between the convention tariff and the reimbursement by RIZIV/INAMI (the national health insurer) is called the ‘co-payment’, an official tariff. In addition, in some circumstances, more than this official tariff is charged by healthcare providers. The latter is called ‘supplements’, i.e. the difference between the total payments and the convention tariff.[18] Following the Belgian pharmacoeconomic guidelines, the official tariff is taken into account and supplements are excluded.[17]
 
Literature
1.
2.
Roiron C, Sanchez P, Bouzamondo A, et al. Drug eluting stents: an updated meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. Heart 2006 May; 92 (5): 641–9PubMedCrossRef
3.
Nordmann AJ, Briel M, Bucher HC. Mortality in randomized controlled trials comparing drug-eluting vs bare metal stents in coronary artery disease: a meta-analysis. Eur Heart J 2006 Dec; 27 (23): 2784–814PubMedCrossRef
4.
Stettler C, Wandel S, Allemann S, et al. Outcomes associated with drug-eluting and bare-metal stents: a collaborative network meta-analysis. Lancet 2007; 370: 937–48PubMedCrossRef
5.
Spaulding C, Daemen J, Boersma E, et al. A pooled analysis of data comparing sirolimus-eluting stents with bare-metal stents. N Engl J Med 2007 Mar 8; 356 (10): 989–97PubMedCrossRef
6.
Stone GW, Moses JW, Ellis SG, et al. Safety and efficacy of sirolimus- and paclitaxel-eluting coronary stents. N Engl J Med 2007 Mar 8; 356 (10): 998–1008PubMedCrossRef
7.
Kastrati A, Mehilli J, Pache J, et al. Analysis of 14 trials comparing sirolimus-eluting stents with bare-metal stents. N Engl J Med 2007 Mar 8; 356 (10): 1030–9PubMedCrossRef
8.
9.
Austin D, Pell JP, Oldroyd KG. Drug-eluting stents: do the risks really outweigh the benefits? Heart 2008 Feb; 94 (2): 127–8PubMedCrossRef
10.
Neyt M, Van Brabandt H, Devriese S, et al. Drug eluting stents in Belgium: health technology assessment [KCE reports 66C]. Brussels: Belgian Health Care Knowledge Centre (KCE), 2007
11.
Daemen J, Wenaweser P, Tsuchida K, et al. Early and late coronary stent thrombosis of sirolimus-eluting and paclitaxel-eluting stents in routine clinical practice: data from a large two-institutional cohort study. Lancet 2007 Feb 24; 369 (9562): 667–78PubMedCrossRef
12.
13.
Garg P, Cohen DJ, Gaziano T, et al. Balancing the risks of restenosis and stent thrombosis in bare-metal versus drug-eluting stents: results of a decision analytic model. J Am Coll Cardiol 2008 May 13; 51 (19): 1844–53PubMedCrossRef
14.
Maisel WH. Unanswered questions: drug-eluting stents and the risk of late thrombosis. N Engl J Med 2007 Mar 8; 356 (10): 981–4PubMedCrossRef
15.
Belgian Working Group of Interventional Cardiology. Registry data [online]. Available from URL: www.bwgic.org [Accessed 2009 May 5]
16.
17.
Cleemput I, Van Wilder P, Vrijens F, et al. Richtlijnen voor farmacoeconomische evaluaties in België [KCE reports 78A]. Brussels: Federaal Kenniscentrum voor de Gezondheidszorg (KCE), 2008
18.
De Graeve D, Lecluyse A, Schokkaert E, et al. Personal contribution for health care in Belgium. Impact of supplements. Brussels: Belgian Health Care Knowledge Center; 2006. KCE Reports 50A and 50B [online]. Available from URL: http://​www.​kce.​fgov.​be [Accessed 2009 May 11]
19.
Bowen J, Hopkins R, He Y, et al. Systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis of drug eluting stents compared to bare metal stents for percutaneous coronary interventions in Ontario 2005. Interim report prepared for the Ontario Ministry of Health & Long-Term Care (report no.: HTA002–0512) [online]. Available from URL: http://​www.​path-hta.​ca/​DESreport.​pdf [Accessed 2009 Mar 20]
20.
Cohen DJ, Bakhai A, Shi C, et al. Cost-effectiveness of sirolimus-eluting stents for treatment of complex coronary stenoses: results from the sirolimus-eluting balloon expandable stent in the treatment of patients with de novo native coronary artery lesions (SIRIUS) trial. Circulation 2004; 110 (5): 508–14PubMedCrossRef
21.
Ekman M, Sjogren I, James S. Cost-effectiveness of the taxus paclitaxel-eluting stent in the Swedish healthcare system. Scand Cardiovasc J 2006 Feb; 40 (1): 17–24PubMedCrossRef
22.
Greenberg D, Bakhai A, Cohen DJ. Can we afford to eliminate restenosis? Can we afford not to? J Am Coll Cardiol 2004 Feb 18; 43 (4): 513–8PubMedCrossRef
23.
Hill R, Bagust A, Bakhai A, et al. Coronary artery stents: a rapid systematic review and economic evaluation. Health Technol Assess 2004 Sep; 8 (35): iii-iv, 1–242PubMed
24.
Russell S, Antonanzas F, Mainar V. Economic impact of the taxus coronary stent: implications for the Spanish healthcare system. Rev Esp Cardiol 2006 Sep; 59 (9): 889–96PubMedCrossRef
25.
Shrive FM, Manns BJ, Galbraith PD, et al. Economic evaluation of sirolimus-eluting stents. CMAJ 2005 Feb 1; 172 (3): 345–51PubMedCrossRef
26.
Tarricone R, Marchetti M, Lamotte M, et al. What reimbursement for coronary revascularization with drug-eluting stents? Eur J Health Econ 2004 Dec; 5 (4): 309–16PubMedCrossRef
27.
Kaiser C, Brunner-La Rocca HP, Buser PT, et al. Incremental cost-effectiveness of drug-eluting stents compared with a third-generation bare-metal stent in a real-world setting: randomised Basel Stent Kosten Effektivitats Trial (BASKET). Lancet 2005 Sep 10–16; 366 (9489): 921–9PubMedCrossRef
28.
Bagust A, Grayson AD, Palmer ND, et al. Cost effectiveness of drug eluting coronary artery stenting in a UK setting: cost-utility study. Heart 2006 Jan; 92 (1): 68–74PubMedCrossRef
29.
Kiemeneij F, Serruys PW, Macaya C, et al. Continued benefit of coronary stenting versus balloon angioplasty: five-year clinical follow-up of Benestent-I trial. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001 May; 37 (6): 1598–603PubMedCrossRef
30.
31.
Blood clots a late hazard for drug-coated stents: the benefits of drug-coated stents come with a price. Long term use of clot-preventing drugs. Harv Heart Lett 2006 Aug; 16 (12): 1–3
32.
Briggs AH, Claxton K, Sculpher MJ. Decision modelling for health economic evaluation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006
33.
Serruys PW, Unger F, Sousa JE, et al. Comparison of coronary-artery bypass surgery and stenting for the treatment of multivessel disease. N Engl J Med 2001 Apr 12; 344 (15): 1117–24PubMedCrossRef
34.
35.
Rice JA. Mathematical statistics and data analysis. Belmont (CA): Duxbury Press, 1995
36.
37.
Ong ATL, Daemen J, van Hout BA, et al. Cost-effectiveness of the unrestricted use of sirolimus-eluting stents vs bare metal stents at 1 and 2-year follow-up: results from the RESEARCH Registry. Eur Heart J 2006 Dec; 27 (24): 2996–3003PubMedCrossRef
38.
Ward MR. Cost-benefit of drug eluting stents: time for a reality check. Heart Lung Circ 2005; 14 (2): 74–7PubMedCrossRef
39.
Hirshfeld Jr JW, Wilensky RL. Drug-eluting stents are here: now what? Implications for clinical practice and health care costs. Cleve Clin J Med 2004; 71 (10): 825–8PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Cost Effectiveness of Drug-Eluting Stents In Belgian Practice
Healthcare Payer Perspective
Authors
Dr Mattias Neyt
Chris De Laet
Annemieke De Ridder
Hans Van Brabandt
Publication date
01-04-2009
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
PharmacoEconomics / Issue 4/2009
Print ISSN: 1170-7690
Electronic ISSN: 1179-2027
DOI
https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200927040-00004

Other articles of this Issue 4/2009

PharmacoEconomics 4/2009 Go to the issue

Review Article

Reviewing the Cost Effectiveness of Rotavirus Vaccination

Review Article

Willingness to Pay for Cancer Prevention

Original Research Article

Clinical Effectiveness and Cost Effectiveness of Tailoring Chronic Hepatitis C Treatment with Peginterferon Alpha-2b Plus Ribavirin to HCV Genotype and Early Viral Response

Original Research Article

Impact of Transdermal Oxybutynin on Work Productivity in Patients with Overactive Bladder

Leading Article

Economic and Human Costs of Restless Legs Syndrome