Colonic stent versus surgery for the management of acute malignant colonic obstruction: a decision analysis.

BACKGROUND Acute colonic obstruction because of advanced colonic malignancy is a surgical emergency. AIM To compare the clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of endoscopic self-expanding metal stent (SEMS) vs. surgery for emergent management of acute malignant colonic obstruction in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer over a 6-month period. METHODS Decision analysis was used to calculate the cost-effectiveness and success of two competing strategies in a hypothetical patient with metastatic colon cancer presenting with acute, malignant colonic obstruction: (i) emergent colonic stent (SEMS cohort); (ii) emergent surgical resection followed by diversion (surgery cohort). RESULTS Self-expanding metal stent resulted in a success and a lower mortality rate when compared to surgery over a 6-month period. Colonic SEMS was also associated with a lower mean cost per patient (USD 27,225 vs. USD 57,398). Mortality in the surgery group was 25 times that of the SEMS cohort. One- and two-way sensitivity analyses identified SEMS as the dominant strategy. CONCLUSION Colonic stent insertion is more effective and less costly than surgery for the management of colonic obstruction in patients with metastatic colon cancer.