Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Leadless Pacemakers in France

352 patients from a French hospital cohort were analyzed to compare leadless and transvenous pacemakers. François Avry authored this retrospective study covering implantations from 2016 to 2020. It evaluates four-year costs, procedure duration, hospital stay, and major clinical events.

Use Cases

• Compare procedure duration (52 vs 80 minutes) and hospital stay (3.6 vs 4.3 days) between device types.
• Analyze the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (€20,387 per life-year gained) using four-year cost and survival data.
• Model cost-effectiveness acceptability curves from the bootstrapped distribution of net monetary benefits.
• Investigate the relationship between implantation costs (€11,344 vs €9,326) and total four-year costs (€12,925 vs €11,713).
• Assess the probability (70%) of cost-effectiveness at a €35,000 per life-year threshold.

Strengths

• Analysis includes 352 real-world patient records (104 LP, 248 SLP).
• Data covers a four-year follow-up period for cost and outcome comparison.
• Study employs propensity weighting and bootstrap analysis for statistical robustness.

Limitations

• Dataset is small (374.7 KB), limiting the scope for complex modeling.
• Patient cohort is from a single center in France, limiting geographic generalizability.
• Sample size for the leadless pacemaker group (104 patients) is relatively small.

Provenance

Source

Retrospective hospital cohort study by François Avry.

Collection Method

Propensity-weighted cost-effectiveness analysis of patient records.

Time Range

2016 to 2020 (implantations), with four-year follow-up.

Freshness

Data covers procedures from 2016 to 2020, with study publication in 2026.

Geography

France (single hospital center).