Use of propensity score in cost-effectiveness analysis using drug-eluting and bare metal stents

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND Studies on the cost-effectiveness ratio of drug-eluting stents (DES) are rare. Our objective was to evaluate the results and compare costs (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio – ICER) per restenosis avoided between DES and bare metal stents (BMS) using the propensity score. METHODS Two hundred and twenty consecutive patients were included in the study, of which 111 were treated with DES and 109 with BMS. The propensity score was used to adjust the effect of the intervention, by means of matching, stratification and weighing. RESULTS Most patients were male (67.7% vs. 66.9%; P = 0.53), with a mean age of 65.9 years. Patients treated with the DES had a higher rate of diabetes (54% vs. 17.4%; P 72 years, diabetes and lesions with diameter 18 mm. CONCLUSIONS Although DES were not cost-effective in the overall population, the propensity score showed that in elderly patients, diabetics and patients with long lesions or small vessels, the use of DES was cost-effective.