, Volume 27, Issue 4, pp 313–327 | Cite as

Cost Effectiveness of Drug-Eluting Stents In Belgian Practice

Healthcare Payer Perspective
  • Mattias Neyt
  • Chris De Laet
  • Annemieke De Ridder
  • Hans Van Brabandt
Original Research Article


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.


Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Clopidogrel Bare Metal Stents Late Stent Thrombosis Stent Restenosis 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



Researchers from the University of Antwerp received funding from the Belgian Health Care Knowledge Centre (KCE) for their contribution to the Health Technology Assessment report on drug-eluting stents (research project 2006–08). The authors received no sources of funding to assist in the preparation of this study. The authors have no conflicts of interest relevant to the content of this study.

Supplementary material

40273_2012_27040313_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (158 kb)
Supplementary material, approximately 162 KB.


  1. 1.
    Stone GW. Editor’s note. Circulation 2007 Jul; 116: 232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 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): 641–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 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): 2784–814PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 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: 937–48PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 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): 989–97PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 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): 998–1008PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 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): 1030–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Melikian N, Wijns W. Drug-eluting stents: a critique. Heart 2008 Feb; 94 (2): 145–52PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Austin D, Pell JP, Oldroyd KG. Drug-eluting stents: do the risks really outweigh the benefits? Heart 2008 Feb; 94 (2): 127–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 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), 2007Google Scholar
  11. 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): 667–78PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Eisenberg MJ. Drug-eluting stents: some bare facts. Lancet 2004 Oct 23–29; 364 (9444): 1466–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 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): 1844–53PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Maisel WH. Unanswered questions: drug-eluting stents and the risk of late thrombosis. N Engl J Med 2007 Mar 8; 356 (10): 981–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Belgian Working Group of Interventional Cardiology. Registry data [online]. Available from URL: [Accessed 2009 May 5]Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sectoraal Comite voor de Sociale Zekerheid en Volksgezondheid. Beraadslaging nr. 06/087 van 5 december 2006 betreffende de overmaking van persoonsgegevens aan het federaal kenniscentrum voor de gezondheidszorg in het kader van het project kce nr. 2006–08 “Health Technology Assessment Study on Drug Eluting Stents” [online]. Available from URL: [Accessed 2009 Mar 20]
  17. 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), 2008Google Scholar
  18. 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: [Accessed 2009 May 11]
  19. 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: [Accessed 2009 Mar 20]
  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): 508–14PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 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): 17–24PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 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): 513–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 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, 1–242PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 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): 889–96PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Shrive FM, Manns BJ, Galbraith PD, et al. Economic evaluation of sirolimus-eluting stents. CMAJ 2005 Feb 1; 172 (3): 345–51PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 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): 309–16PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 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): 921–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 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): 68–74PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 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): 1598–603PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Belgian Centre for Farmacotherapeutic Information [online]. Available from URL: [Accessed 2009 Mar 9]
  31. 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): 1–3Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Briggs AH, Claxton K, Sculpher MJ. Decision modelling for health economic evaluation. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006Google Scholar
  33. 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): 1117–24PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Dolan P. Modeling valuations for EuroQol health states. Med Care 1997 Nov; 35 (11): 1095–108PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Rice JA. Mathematical statistics and data analysis. Belmont (CA): Duxbury Press, 1995Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Eisenberg MJ. Drug-eluting stents: the price is not right. Circulation 2006; 114 (16): 1745–54PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 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): 2996–3003PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Ward MR. Cost-benefit of drug eluting stents: time for a reality check. Heart Lung Circ 2005; 14 (2): 74–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 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): 825–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis Data Information BV 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mattias Neyt
    • 1
  • Chris De Laet
    • 1
  • Annemieke De Ridder
    • 2
  • Hans Van Brabandt
    • 1
  1. 1.Belgian Health Care Knowledge CentreBrusselsBelgium
  2. 2.Department of Mathematics, Statistics and Actuarial SciencesUniversity of AntwerpAntwerpBelgium

Personalised recommendations