OBJECTIVES: To assess the cost-effectiveness of daptomycin versus glycopeptides (vancomycin and teicoplanin), the most widely used alternatives in the treatment of patients with infective endocarditis and bacteremia caused by Methicillin resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (MRSA) from the perspective of Turkish health care system. METHODS: The clinical trials with daptomycin were powered to show non-inferiority against vancomycin. The model is based on a cost-minimization analysis, assuming similar efficacy between daptomycin and glycopeptides. However, median length of inpatient treatment, hence hospital stay differed among therapies in the trial. A decision-analytic model was designed to estimate the use of resources and costs based on treatment duration and patterns. The model time horizon was from the first day of the hospitalization to successful treatment. Resource utilization was collected from literature and complemented with the help physician survey in Turkey. Resource use consisted of drug costs, iv and im administration costs, monitoring and hospitalization costs. Key parameters and assumptions in the model were explored in sensitivity analyses to determine their impact on the model outcome. RESULTS: The use of daptomycin as first-line therapy resulted in lower cost per patient despite significant daily drug cost difference between alternatives. Total health care costs per patient were €2069 for the daptomycin whereas €2392 and €2419 for the vancomycin and teicoplanin arms respectively, resulting in €323-€350 savings per person with daptomycin treatment. The main cost driver was drug costs, which was responsible for 66% of the total costs on average. CONCLUSIONS: Daptomycin is less costly than both vancomycin and teicoplanin in the treatment of MRSA induced bacteremia and infective endocarditis when used as first-line therapy. The cost-savings with daptomycin in Turkey largely stem from shorter treatment duration with daptomycin due to its highly effective and rapid bactericidal activity.