OBJECTIVES: Cost-Effectiveness analysis of Drug Eluting Balloon (DEB) vs. Percutaneous Transluminal Balloon Angioplasty (PTA), Bare Metal Stent (BMS) and Drug Eluting Stent (DES) in the treatment of Peripheral Arterial Disease in lower limbs in Colombia. METHODS: An analytical decision model was considered with Target Lesion Restenosis (TLR) avoided and total cost at the end of a two year period as endpoints. An Excel model was developed. For the effectiveness data a Meta-analysis was done and second revascularization procedures probabilities were taken with KOL criterion. A public payer perspective was assumed. Total costs were taken from reimbursement values charged to payers. Because effectiveness and cost were taken as unique values at the end of the two years with no cycles, discount rate was no applied. The sensitivity Univariate analysis was done for DEB vs. PTA. For the Probabilistic Sensitivity Analysis a Monte Carlo Simulation with 1000 iterations was done. RESULTS: TLR Avoided probability with DEB was 0.86 vs. 0.60, 0.72 and 0.81 for PTA, BMS and DES respectively.  DEB total cost was US$4.441 vs. US$3.893 for PTA, US$4.826 for BMS and US$5.599 for DES. Respect to PTA, DEB ICER was US$2.142, US$7.776 for BMS and US$8.204 for DES. In univariate sensitivity the DEB ICER   was especially sensible to total costs for both therapies and for the TLR probability for PTA. The Willingness-To-Pay (WTP) acceptability curves show that DEB, compared to other therapies, had a higher probability to be accepted for all the WTP values above US$2.500, reaching a probability of 94% for US$10.000 WTP value CONCLUSIONS: DEB have better cost-effectiveness ratio than PTA, with an ICER of US$2.142 and was dominant over BMS and DES. The univariate sensitivity analysis shows the ICER of DEB vs. PTA was especially sensible to the total costs of the therapies and the effectiveness of PTA