Lago-Quinteiro José Ramón, Reyes-Santias Francisco, Antelo Manel, Caballer-Tarazona Vicent, Martinez-Sande José Luis, Garcia-Seara Javier, Rodriguez-Manero Moisés, Gonzalez-Juanatey Jose Ramon
Servicio de Cardiologia, Hospital Clínico Universitario de Santiago, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
Business Organisation and Marketing, Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red Enfermedades cardiovasculares (CIBERCV), ISCIII, Universidade de Vigo, Vigo, Spain.
Ann Med. 2025 Dec;57(1):2512108. doi: 10.1080/07853890.2025.2512108. Epub 2025 May 29.
The evolution in pacemaker technologies has led to improvements in size, weight, functionality, and durability, even as the battery and electrode-based structural configuration has remained essentially the same.
To compare the cost-effectiveness and cost-utility of conventional and leadless pacemakers.
We conducted a retrospective observational study of 403 patients randomly implanted with a conventional or leadless pacemaker (1 June 2015-31 January 2020) in the Hospital-University Complex of Santiago de Compostela (Galicia, NW Spain).
Conventional and leadless pacemakers were implanted in 244 and 159 patients, respectively. Leadless pacemakers were superior to the conventional pacemakers in terms of both cost-effectiveness and cost-utility, with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of 6,263.38 euros per gained life year and of 5,210.71 euros per quality-adjusted life year, respectively.
Leadless pacemakers have fewer complications than conventional pacemakers and, although the device itself is more expensive, the leadless pacemaker is more cost-effective in around 90% of cases.
尽管起搏器技术的发展使得其在尺寸、重量、功能和耐用性方面有所改进，但基于电池和电极的结构配置基本保持不变。
比较传统起搏器和无导线起搏器的成本效益和成本效用。
我们对在圣地亚哥德孔波斯特拉大学医院综合院区（西班牙西北部加利西亚）于2015年6月1日至2020年1月31日期间随机植入传统起搏器或无导线起搏器的403例患者进行了一项回顾性观察研究。
分别有244例和159例患者植入了传统起搏器和无导线起搏器。无导线起搏器在成本效益和成本效用方面均优于传统起搏器，每获得一个生命年的增量成本效益比为6263.38欧元，每获得一个质量调整生命年的增量成本效益比分别为5210.71欧元。
无导线起搏器的并发症比传统起搏器少，尽管该设备本身更昂贵，但在约90%的情况下，无导线起搏器更具成本效益。
