ArticleJournal of vascular surgery2018
Implementation of drug-eluting stents for the treatment of femoropopliteal disease provides significant cost-to-system savings in a single-state outpatient simulation.
Article in Journal of vascular surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Cost-saving strategies for sustainable surgical care: a scoping review of efficiency models and potential approaches for low-income and middle-income countries.BMJ global health · 2026Article
- Introducing and utilizing innovative technologies in health care systems: a country comparison for peripheral drug-eluting stents in Germany and the USA.Frontiers in public health · 2025Review
- State-of-the-Art Endovascular Therapies for the Femoropopliteal Segment: Are We There Yet?Journal of the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography & InterventionsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesInitial data on drug-eluting stents (DES) shows that they may increase the durability of endovascular treatment of superficial femoral artery disease compared with traditional bare-metal stents (BMS). Observed decreased target lesion revascularization (TLR) rates have potential for cost savings despite an increased initial cost. The purpose of this study was to run a simulation model of progressive transition from BMS to DES over 5 years evaluating the overall cost impact of that transition.
methodsFlorida State Ambulatory Databases were searched for all patients undergoing superficial femoral artery stenting in 2013 using Current Procedural Terminology codes 37226 and 37227. A simulation model was developed to estimate the impact of a progressive transition from BMS to DES over a 5-year horizon in this patient population. Cost estimates were determined from available cost charge ratio data. For the 5-year model, 2013 served as the initial year with each subsequent year based on the expected number of interventions per year. Up to one TLR per patient was assumed for the model. The 5-year TLR rates for DES and other parameter estimates were based on pooled data from the literature. Institutional data were used to estimate that up to 48% of superficial femoral artery lesions would fit the instructions for use for the Zilver PTX (Cook Medical, Bloomington, Ind), which is currently the only DES approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for peripheral interventions. The net budget impact was expressed as the difference in total costs (primary stenting and reinterventions) for a scenario where BMS is progressively replaced by Zilver PTX compared with a scenario of BMS only. Multiple sensitivity analyses were performed on the base scenario.
resultsWe identified 4107 peripheral interventions in the first year that fit our study. The overall cost for these procedures in Florida database was $51,362,142.00. In the base case scenario, DES was introduced slowly into the population at a rate of 8% per year up to 48% at the end of the model. This strategy resulted in an overall cost savings of $1,688,953.72 compared with the model with BMS alone. Sensitivity analyses including slower adoption of DES up to only 24% at 5 years, a 20% increase in TLR rates per year for the DES, and a 10% reduction in TLR rates per year for BMS still resulted in a net savings. As long as the additional cost of a DES compared with BMS is less than $677, the DES model remains less expensive.
conclusionsThe adoption of DES in lieu of traditional BMS can lead to significant cost savings in a single state model over a short time horizon.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.