HC Deb 19 June 2002 vol 387 cc437-8W
Dr. Gibson

To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether primary care trusts are obliged to wait for NICE guidance on drug eluting stents before allowing their use in patients. [61628]

Ms Blears

The absence of guidelines from the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) does not prevent the national health service using new drugs or technologies. Standing guidance to the NHS says specifically that they should not wait for NICE guidance, but should in the interim, make a local decision about whether to fund particular interventions on the basis of the available published information.

Dr. Gibson

To ask the Secretary of State for Health whether his Department has made an assessment of how the use of drug eluting stents will contribute to revascularisation targets set out in the national service framework on coronary heart disease. [61627]

Ms Blears

The Department referred drug eluting stents to the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) on 20 May 2002. NICE will provide evidence-based advice on their appropriate use, and at that time an assessment can be made of how drug eluting stents will contribute to revascularisation targets set out in the national service framework on coronary heart disease.

Dr. Gibson

To ask the Secretary of State for Health what restenosis rate is associated with the use of bare stents in the UK. [61626]

Ms Blears: The Department does not collect data relating to the restenosis rate associated with the use of bare stents in England.

Mr. Burstow

To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment his Department has made of the relative cost effectiveness of the(a) coronary artery bypass graft for coronary heart disease and (b) percutaneous coronary intervention; and if he will make a statement. [61363]

Ms Blears

[holding answer 17 June 2002]: The Department has made no assessment of the relative cost-effectiveness of coronary artery bypass graft and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). In general, PCI is a less expensive procedure. It is a less invasive procedure for the patient allowing for a quicker recovery and requiring a shorter hospital stay. The decision as to which procedure is appropriate is a clinical one based on an assessment of the individual patient, and for patients who are not suitable for PCI, coronary artery bypass graft may be the only appropriate intervention.

Mr. Burstow

To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment he has made of the average number of bed days for recovery from percutaneous coronary interventions in the last year for which figures are available. [61366]

Ms Blears

[holding answer 17 June 2002]: The average post-operative duration of stay for percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty in 2000–01 was two days. This figure is based on finished consultant episodes. There will be a small number of patients who may be transferred to another consultant following the operation, which is not reflected in this average.