Cost-Effectiveness of a Novel Self-Apposing Stent in ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI) in France - European Medical Journal

Cost-Effectiveness of a Novel Self-Apposing Stent in ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction (STEMI) in France

Download PDF
*Lieven Annemans,1 Johanne Silvain,2 Gilles Montalescot2,3

L.A. is a consultant to STENTYS. J.S. and G.M. have received a research grant to the institution from STENTYS.

EMJ Cardiol. ;3[1]:22-29. DOI/10.33590/emjcardiol/10311664.
Cost-effectiveness, self-apposing stent, France, quality-adjusted life year (QALY), STENTYS

Each article is made available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial 4.0 License.


The objective was to calculate the cost-effectiveness profile of STENTYS compared to conventional  bare and drug-eluting stents (DES). Stents are widely used in the treatment of patients with ST-segment  elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). However, several reports point to the prevailing risk of coronary events such as recurrent myocardial infarction, some of which are related to in-stent thrombosis, possibly explained by poorly apposed stents. 1-year results of the self-apposing stent, STENTYS, are promising regarding the incidence of fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular (CV) events. A model was developed to simulate costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) over 1-5 years. In the first 12 months, a decision tree framework was used to define different CV outcomes for STEMI patients receiving a stent. After 12 months, outcomes were categorised in a Markov stage of the model as myocardial infarction (MI), other CV events, revascularisation, and death. Cost of comparative treatments and follow-up in relation to CV events were calculated from the French health insurance perspective. The results indicated, in the base case, over a time horizon of 5 years, that STENTYS bare metal stent (BMS) is dominant (less costly and more QALYs) against conventional DES. The STENTYS DES is dominant compared with conventional DES and very cost-effective versus BMS. The results were robust for different variations in the input  variables. This first analysis of the cost-effectiveness of STENTYS showed that it is dominant or very costeffective as compared to conventional stents. Further comparative research and longer follow-up data  are needed to expand on these results.

Please view the full content in the PDF above. 

Please rate the quality of this content

As you found this content interesting...

Follow us on social media!

We are sorry that this content was not interesting for you!

Let us improve this content!

Tell us how we can improve this content?

Keep your finger on the pulse

Join Now

Elevating the Quality of Healthcare Globally