Objective: To assess the cost-effectiveness of prucalopride vs. continued laxative treatment for chronic constipation in patients in the Netherlands in whom laxatives have failed to provide adequate relief. Methods: A Markov model was developed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of prucalopride in patients with chronic constipation receiving standard laxative treatment from the perspective of Dutch payers in 2011. Data sources included published prucalopride clinical trials, published Dutch price/tariff lists, and national population statistics. The model simulated the clinical and economic outcomes associated with prucalopride vs. standard treatment and had a cycle length of 1 month and a follow-up time of 1 year. Response to treatment was defined as the proportion of patients who achieved "normal bowel function". One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to test the robustness of the base case. Results: In the base case analysis, the cost of prucalopride relative to continued laxative treatment was 9015 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). Extensive sensitivity analyses and scenario analyses confirmed that the base case cost-effectiveness estimate was robust. One-way sensitivity analyses showed that the model was most sensitive in response to prucalopride; incremental cost-effectiveness ratios ranged from 6475 to 15,380 per QALY. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses indicated that there is a greater than 80% probability that prucalopride would be cost-effective compared with continued standard treatment, assuming a willingness-to-pay threshold of 20,000 per QALY from a Dutch societal perspective. A scenario analysis was performed for women only, which resulted in a cost-effectiveness ratio of (sic) 7773 per QALY. Conclusion: Prucalopride was cost-effective in a Dutch patient population, as well as in a women-only subgroup, who had chronic constipation and who obtained inadequate relief from laxatives.