Aims: Remote haemodynamic monitoring with an implantable pulmonary artery (PA) sensor has been shown to reduce heart failure (HF) hospitalizations and improve quality of life. Cost-effectiveness analyses studying the value of remote haemodynamic monitoring in a European healthcare system with a contemporary standard care group are lacking. Methods and results: A Markov model was developed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of PA-guided therapy compared to the standard of care based upon patient-level data of the MONITOR-HF trial performed in the Netherlands in patients with chronic HF (New York Heart Association class III and at least one previous HF hospitalization). Cost-effectiveness was measured as the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained from the Dutch societal perspective with a lifetime horizon which encompasses a wide variety of costs including costs of hospitalizations, monitoring time, telephone contacts, laboratory assessments, and drug changes in both treatment groups. In the base-case analysis, PA-guided therapy increased costs compared to standard of care by €12 121. The QALYs per patient for PA-guided therapy and standard of care was 4.07 and 3.481, respectively, reflecting a gain of 0.58 QALYs. The resulting incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was €20 753 per QALY, which is below the Dutch willingness-to-pay threshold of €50 000 per QALY gained for HF. Conclusions: The current cost-effectiveness study suggests that remote haemodynamic monitoring with PA-guided therapy on top of standard care is likely to be cost-effective for patients with symptomatic moderate-to-severe HF in the Netherlands.