[Differences in in-hospital charge for percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty with and without the use of coronary stent].

The cost of in-hospital percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA) has risen since the introduction of the coronary stent. Increased attention is now being given to the PTCA charges in Japan and a multicenter study is necessary with regard to in-hospital charges. To clarify the differences in in-hospital charges for PTCA with and without coronary stent [Stent Group and plain old balloon angioplasty (POBA) Group, respectively], we studied the PTCA charges of 352 patients in 6 hospitals. Age, male gender and extent of coronary artery disease were not different. The ratio of acute myocardial infarction ranged from 16% to 64% and that of coronary stenting ranged from 24% to 65% (p < 0.001). In-hospital charge ranged from 1.4 +/- 0.8 to 2.2 +/- 1.0 million yen (p < 0.0001). The procedural charge accounted for 53% to 75% of the in-hospital charge (p < 0.01). The in-hospital charge ranged from 1.6 +/- 0.7 to 3.3 +/- 1.6 million yen in the Stent Group, higher than the charge of 1.1 +/- 0.8 to 1.9 +/- 0.7 million yen in the POBA Group (p < 0.0001). There was a statistical difference in the number of balloon catheters used (1.1 +/- 0.4 to 2.1 +/- 0.9, p < 0.005) but not in the mean number of stents used (1.1 +/- 0.3 to 1.4 +/- 0.7). The procedural charge of the institutes with higher stenting rate (> 45%) seemed to be lower than that of the institutes with lower stenting rate (p < 0.02). In conclusion, there are large variation between institutions in PTCA charges, and in-hospital charges increased with the use of stents on introduction of the Diagnosis Related Group used in the United States. We should charge separately for coronary stenting and POBA. Despite any initial increase in the in-hospital charge for coronary stenting compared to POBA, successful stent implantation will result in a superior saving in procedural charges.