BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) causes a significant health and economic burden to the Dutch society. Dabigatran was proven to have at least similar efficacy and a similar or better safety profile when compared to vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) in preventing arterial thromboembolism in patients with AF. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness and monetary benefit of dabigatran versus VKAs in Dutch patients with non-valvular AF. Value-based pricing considerations and corresponding negotiations on dabigatran will be explicitly considered. METHODS: The base case economic analysis was conducted from the societal perspective. Health effects and costs were analysed using a Markov model. The main model inputs were derived from the RE-LY trial and Dutch observational data. Univariate, probabilistic sensitivity, and various scenario analyses were performed. RESULTS: Dabigatran was cost saving compared to VKAs. A total of 4,552 QALYs were gained and €13,892,288 was saved in a cohort of 10,000 AF patients. The economic value of dabigatran was strongly related to the costs of VKA control that are averted. Notably, dabigatran was cost saving compared to VKAs if annual costs of VKA control exceeded €159 per person or dabigatran costs were below €2.81 per day. CONCLUSION: Dabigatran was cost saving compared to VKAs for the prevention of atrial thromboembolism in patients with non-valvular AF in the Netherlands. This result appeared robust in the sensitivity analysis. Furthermore, volume based reduction of the price in the Netherlands will further increase the monetary benefits of dabigatran.