Long-term outcomes of endoscopic gallbladder stenting in high-risk surgical patients with calculous cholecystitis (with videos)

Approaches to Cholecystitis: Surgical, Endoscopic, and Percutaneous Management

Acute cholecystitis (AC) is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Minimally invasive laparoscopic cholecystectomy remains the gold standard of treatment. Therapeutic endoscopy for management of AC continues to emerge as a favorable alternative to percutaneous gallbladder drainage in patients with prohibitive operative risk. Endoscopic management of AC includes transpapillary and transmural stenting. When patient-specific factors prevent both surgical and endoscopic treatment, percutaneous cholecystostomy tube (PCT) placement is an option. Early studies show PCT to have worse outcomes when compared against all other described treatment options for the management of AC.

Endoscopic Gallbladder Stenting to Prevent Recurrent Cholecystitis in Deferred Cholecystectomy: A Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder stenting (ETGS) has been proposed as one of the adjunctive treatments, apart from antibiotics, before surgery in patients with acute cholecystitis whose cholecystectomy could not be performed or was deferred. Currently, there are no comparative data on the outcomes of ETGS in those who receive and do not receive ETGS. We aimed to compare the rates of recurrent cholecystitis at 3 and 6 months in these 2 groups.

METHODS

Between 2020 and 2023, eligible acute calculous cholecystitis patients with a high probability of common bile duct stone, who were surgical candidates but could not have an early cholecystectomy during COVID-19 surgical lockdown, were randomized into groups A (received ETGS) and B (did not receive ETGS). A definitive cholecystectomy was performed at 3 months or later in both groups.

RESULTS

A total of 120 eligible patients were randomized into group A (n = 60) and group B (n = 60). In group A, technical and clinical success rates were 90% (54 of 60) and 100% (54 of 54), respectively. Based on intention-to-treat analysis, group A had a significantly lower rate of recurrence than group B at 3 months (0% [0 of 60] vs 18.3% [11 of 60]; P = .001). At 3-6 months, group A showed a nonsignificantly lower rate of recurrent cholecystitis compared to group B (0% [0 of 32] vs 10% [3 of 30]; P = .11).

CONCLUSIONS

ETGS could prevent recurrent cholecystitis in acute cholecystitis patients with common bile duct stone whose cholecystectomy was deferred for 3 months. In those who did not receive ETGS, the majority of recurrences occurred within 3 months. (Thaiclinicaltrials.org, Number TCTR20200913001).

Factors predicting technical failure of endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage for acute cholecystitis

Objectives

Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETGBD) is a highly technical procedure, but few studies have evaluated factors that predict its technical success. Therefore, in this study, we sought to identify predictors of technically successful ETGBD.

Methods

One hundred and eighty-two patients who underwent ETGBD for acute cholecystitis at our hospital were retrospectively investigated. Factors associated with technical failure were identified by focusing on clinical characteristics, anatomical features (direction of the cystic duct branch and course of the cystic duct), and procedural factors (cystic duct and gallbladder with or without contrast and cystic duct injury).

Results

The technical success rate was 84.6% (154/182) and the clinical success rate was 96.1% (148/154). The adverse event rate was 11.0% (20/182; cystic duct injury in 13 patients, pancreatitis in six, and liver abscess in one. Univariate and multivariate analyses identified the right cranial direction and spiral-type course of the cystic duct to be significant anatomical features and cystic duct injury to be a significant procedural feature contributing to the technical failure of ETGBD.

Conclusions

ETGBD is a highly practical procedure for patients with acute cholecystitis. However, difficulty is encountered in some cases because of anatomical and procedural factors. Our results suggest that ETGBD may be difficult and thus should not be performed in cases with the right cranial direction or spiral-type course of the cystic duct or those with cystic duct injury.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage with long-term lumen-apposing metal stent indwell: 1-year results from a prospective nationwide observational study

BACKGROUND AND AIM

This study aimed to determine safety and risk factors for adverse events (AEs) of endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) with long-term indwell of lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS).

METHODS

This study is a multicenter prospective observational study on consecutive high surgical-risk patients requiring gallbladder drainage who underwent EUS-GBD with LAMS over 12 months. Centralized telephone follow-up interviews were conducted every 3 months for 1 year. Patients were censored at LAMS removal, cholecystectomy, or death. AE-free survival was determined using log-rank tests. Cumulative risks were estimated using life-table analysis.

RESULTS

Eighty-two patients were included (53.7% male, median [interquartile range] age of 84.6 [76.5-89.8] years, and 85.4% with acute cholecystitis). Technical success was achieved in 79 (96.3%), and clinical success in 73 (89%). No patient was lost to follow-up; 45 patients (54.9%) completed 1-year follow-up with in situ LAMS. Median (interquartile range) LAMS indwell time was 364 (47-367) days. Overall, 12 (14.6%) patients presented 14 AEs, including 5 (6.1%) recurrent biliary events (3 acute cholangitis, 1 mild acute pancreatitis, and 1 acute cholecystitis). Patients with pancreatobiliary malignancy had an increased risk of recurrent biliary events (33% vs 1.5%, P = 0.001). The overall 1-year cumulative risk of recurrent biliary events was 9.7% (4.1-21.8%). The 1-year risk of AEs and of severe AEs was 18.8% (11-31.2%) and 7.9% (3.3-18.2%), respectively. Pancreatobiliary malignancy was the single risk factor for recurrent biliary events; LAMS misdeployment was the strongest risk factor for AEs.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term LAMS indwell does not increase the risk of delayed AEs following EUS-GBD.

Assessment of Gallbladder Drainage Methods in the Treatment of Acute Cholecystitis: A Literature Review

Gallbladder drainage is a treatment option in high-risk surgical patients with moderate or severe acute cholecystitis. It may be applied as a bridge to cholecystectomy or a definitive treatment option. Apart from the simple and widely accessible percutaneous cholecystostomy, new attractive techniques have emerged in the previous decade, including endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage and endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage. The aim of this paper is to present currently available drainage techniques in the treatment of AC; evaluate their technical and clinical effectiveness, advantages, possible adverse events, and patient outcomes; and illuminate the decision-making path when choosing among various treatment modalities for each patient, depending on their clinical characteristics and the accessibility of methods.

Endoscopic gallbladder inside-stenting combined with aspirated lavage for calculous cholecystitis in poor surgical candidates: a prospective pilot study

Although long-term stent placement via endoscopic gallbladder stenting (EGBS) reportedly reduces cholecystitis recurrence in patients unfit to undergo cholecystectomy, it can increase the frequency of other late adverse events (AEs) such as cholangitis. This study aimed to examine the feasibility of endoscopic gallbladder inside-stenting (EGB-IS) with lavage and aspiration. This prospective, single-center, pilot study enrolled 83 patients with acute calculous cholecystitis who were poor candidates for surgery. A dedicated catheter with eight side holes was used for lavage and aspiration, and a dedicated single-pigtail stent equipped with a thread was used for EGB-IS. Outcomes such as technical success, clinical success, early AEs, recurrence of cholecystitis, and other symptomatic late AEs associated with EGB-IS with lavage and aspiration were evaluated. The technical and clinical success rates were 80.7% (67/83) and 98.5% (66/67), respectively. The rate of early AEs was 3.6% (3/83). The rate of recurrent cholecystitis was 4.5% (3/66) and that of symptomatic late AEs (besides cholecystitis) was 6.1% (4/66). Consequently, the rate of overall late AEs (cholecystitis plus other events) was 10.6% (7/66). The 1-, 2-, and 3-year cumulative incidence rates of all late AEs were 3.2%, 11.2%, and 18.9%, respectively. EGB-IS with lavage and aspiration for calculous cholecystitis showed promising results in poor surgical candidates. EGB-IS may be useful when EGBS with long-term stent placement is planned, since prevention of cholecystitis recurrence, without a rise in the incidence of other AEs, is anticipated.

Comparison of the long-term outcomes of EUS-guided gallbladder drainage and endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage for calculous cholecystitis in poor surgical candidates: a multicenter propensity score-matched analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Although long-term stent placement using endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETGBD) and EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) reportedly reduces cholecystitis recurrence, comparative evidence of their safety and efficacy is scarce. This study aimed to examine and compare the long-term utility of EUS-GBD versus that of ETGBD in poor surgical candidates.

METHODS

A total of 379 high-risk surgical patients with acute calculous cholecystitis met the eligibility criteria for enrollment in this study. The technical success and adverse events (AEs) were compared between the EUS-GBD and ETGBD groups, and propensity score matching was performed to adjust for differences between the groups. Both groups underwent plastic stent placement, and scheduled stent exchange and removal were not performed in either group.

RESULTS

The technical success rate of EUS-GBD was significantly higher than that of ETGBD (96.7% vs 78.9%, P < .001), whereas the early AE rate did not differ significantly between the 2 methods (7.8% vs 8.9%, P = 1.000). The rate of recurrent cholecystitis did not differ significantly (3.8% vs 3.0%, P = 1.000), but the rate of symptomatic late AEs, in addition to cholecystitis, was significantly lower with EUS-GBD than with ETGBD (1.3% vs 13.4%, P = .006). Consequently, the overall late AE rate was significantly lower with EUS-GBD (5.0% vs 16.4%, P = .029). Multivariate analysis revealed that EUS-GBD was associated with a significantly longer time to late AE (hazard ratio, .26; 95% confidence interval, .10-.67; P = .005).

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term stent placement via EUS-GBD is a promising potential option for limiting late AEs, including recurrence, in poor surgical candidates with calculous cholecystitis.

Endoscopic internalization by cutting versus removal of the endoscopic transpapillary naso-gallbladder drainage tube in preoperative management of acute cholecystitis: A retrospective multicenter cohort study

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic transpapillary naso-gallbladder drainage (ENGBD) has been reported to be an effective treatment option for acute cholecystitis. At our institution, ENGBD was first placed for external fistula management, and endoscopic internalization by cutting was performed, shifting to endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder stenting (EGBS) after improvement of cholecystitis. However, there has been no comparative study to define which preoperative management is better: converting ENGBD to EGBS or removing ENGBD. The study aimed to compare the incidence rate of the late adverse events (AEs) related to biliary system between shifting from ENGBD to EGBS and removal of ENGBD.

METHODS

We retrospectively studied 122 patients who underwent ENGBD for acute cholecystitis between January 2010 and October 2022. The patients were divided into two groups: the cutting group (converting ENGBD to EGBS) and the removal group (removal of ENGBD). The short and late clinical outcomes were compared between groups.

RESULTS

Endoscopic transpapillary naso-gallbladder drainage was successfully placed in 78.6% (96/122), and elective cholecystectomy was performed in 31 and 36 patients in the cutting and removal groups, respectively. The cumulative late-AE rates were 6.4% and 33.3% (p = .007), with a median waiting period for elective cholecystectomy of 58 and 33 days (p = .390) in the cutting and removal groups, respectively. In the multivariate analysis, only endoscopic internalization by cutting was an independent factor affecting late AEs.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic internalization by cutting ENGBD after the resolution of acute cholecystitis was considered effective in reducing the risk of late AEs during the waiting period for an elective cholecystectomy.

Clinical outcomes and predictors of technical failure of endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage in acute cholecystitis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETGBD) has been performed as an alternative therapy against cholecystectomy in patients with acute cholecystitis. To date, few studies have reported the safety, efficacy, and factors affecting ETGBD. We evaluated the clinical outcomes and predictors of technical failure of ETGBD.

METHODS

Patients with acute cholecystitis who underwent ETGBD were retrospectively reviewed, and consecutive patients were included in the study. The technical success rate, clinical success rate, adverse events, and the predictors associated with the technical failure of ETGBD were investigated.

RESULTS

A total of 242 patients were enrolled in the study. The technical success rate of ETGBD and clinical success rate of technically successful ETGBD cases were 87% and 93%, respectively. We experienced cystic duct injury in 24 patients as an ETGBD-related adverse event, and pancreatitis in 12 patients as an endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-related adverse event. Multivariate analysis indicated that cystic duct injury was the independent predictor associated with the technical failure of ETGBD (odds ratio, 11; 95% confidence interval, 3.9-29; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

ETGBD was a safe and effective treatment method for acute cholecystitis with acceptable adverse events. There was no predictor based on the information from patient characteristics; however, cystic duct injury was associated with the technical failure of ETGBD.

Intermediate- to long-term outcomes of endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder stenting in patients with gallstone-related disease: a 10-year single-center experience

BACKGROUND

 Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder stenting (ETGS) can be a bridging therapy to elective cholecystectomy or a permanent gallbladder drainage method in patients with symptomatic gallbladder disease who are awaiting cholecystectomy or are unfit for surgery, respectively. We evaluated the intermediate- to long-term outcomes of ETGS in these groups.

METHODS

 We retrospectively reviewed 234 patients (acute cholecystitis = 147), who were unfit for surgery (n = 50) or had deferred cholecystectomy (n = 184) and who underwent ETGS between 2012 and 2021. A 7-Fr, 15-cm, double-pigtail plastic stent was placed for ETGS without scheduled stent exchange. Biliary event-free rates (i. e. cholecystitis and cholangitis) were determined at 6 months, 1 year, and ≥ 2 years.

RESULTS

 Technical and clinical success rates were 84.6 % (198/234) and 97.4 % (193/198), respectively. Kaplan-Meier analysis (n = 193) showed a biliary event-free rate of 99 % (95 %CI 0.95-1.00) at 6 months, 92 % (95 %CI 0.87-0.97) at 1 year, and 76 % (95 %CI 0.65-0.93) at ≥ 2 years, during a median follow-up period of 564 days (range 200-3001 days).

CONCLUSIONS

 ETGS is an effective biliary drainage method that should be considered in selected cases with common bile duct stone where cholecystectomy could not be performed or was deferred. The biliary event-free rates of ≥ 76 % up to ≥ 2 years further support the use of ETGS in these patient groups.

Long-term outcomes of endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage using a novel spiral plastic stent in acute calculus cholecystitis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder stenting (EGBS) is considered for patients with contraindications to early surgery for acute calculus cholecystitis. However, evidence regarding the long-term outcomes of EGBS is insufficient to date. The aim of the study was to evaluate the feasibility of EGBS as a bridge to or alternative to surgery when there are contraindications.

METHODS

We reviewed the cases of patients who underwent EGBS using a novel spiral-shaped plastic stent for acute calculus cholecystitis between January 2011 and December 2019. We retrospectively evaluated the long-term outcomes of EGBS using a novel spiral-shaped plastic stent.

RESULTS

Forty-nine patients were included. The clinical success rate of EGBS was 97%. After EGBS, 25 patients (surgery group) underwent elective cholecystectomy and 24 patients did not (follow-up group). In the surgery group, the median period from EGBS to surgery was 93 days. There was a single late adverse event with cholecystitis recurrence. In the follow-up group, the median follow-up period was 236 days. Late adverse events were observed in eight patients, including recurrence of cholecystitis (four patients), duodenal penetration by the distal stent end (two patients), and distal stent migration (two patient). In the follow-up group, the time to recurrence of biliary obstruction was 527 days.

CONCLUSIONS

EGBS with a novel spiral-shaped plastic stent is safe and effective for long-term acute calculus cholecystitis. There is a possibility of EGBS to be a bridge to surgery and a surgical alternative for acute calculus cholecystitis in patients with contraindications to early cholecystectomy.

Long-Term Impact of Endoscopic Gallbladder Stenting for Calculous Cholecystitis in Poor Surgical Candidates: A Multi-center Comparative Study

BACKGROUND

Although long-term stent placement using endoscopic gallbladder stenting (EGBS) reportedly reduces cholecystitis recurrence in patients unfit to undergo cholecystectomy, its efficacy and safety remain uncertain.

AIMS

This study aimed to examine the long-term effect of EGBS in poor surgical candidates of cholecystectomy.

METHODS

A total of 528 high-risk surgical patients with acute calculous cholecystitis met this study's eligibility criteria. The technical success and adverse events (AE) were compared between patients who underwent EGBS and those who underwent percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PTGBD). Elective stent exchange and removal were not performed after EGBS. The external tube was removed after improvement of cholecystitis following PTGBD.

RESULTS

The technical success rate was significantly lower with EGBS compared to PTGBD (75.4% versus 98.7%, P < 0.001), while the early-AE rate did not differ significantly between the two methods (7.7% versus 4.3%, P = 0.146). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year cumulative incidence rates of cholecystitis were 3.8%, 7.2%, and 7.2% with EGBS, and 11.7%, 17.6%, and 30.2% with PTGBD, respectively (P = 0.001). Conversely, those of symptomatic late-AE (except cholecystitis) were 8.2%, 22.7%, and 31.4% with EGBS, and 7.5%, 10.9%, and 13.1% with PTGBD, respectively (P = 0.035). Thus, the 1-, 3-, and 5-year cumulative incidence of overall late-AE was 12.0%, 30.4%, and 40.4% with EGBS, and 19.2%, 28.3%, and 42.5% with PTGBD, respectively (P = 0.649).

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term stent placement via EGBS is useful for preventing the recurrence of cholecystitis, but the success rate is low and the frequency of other late-AE increases with the prolongation of the indwelling period.

Endoscopic Management of Acute Cholecystitis

Endoscopic drainage of the gallbladder for acute cholecystitis can be performed with the transpapillary method or endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided method. EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) is gaining popularity as the treatment of choice for acute cholecystitis in patients who are deemed high-risk for cholecystectomy (CCY). It provides an alternative to percutaneous drainage and laparoscopic CCY in these patients. With the development of lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS), the procedure is associated with high rates of technical and clinical success with low rates of adverse events (AEs). The aim of this article is to provide an overview of the current status of EUS-GBD including the indications, techniques, stent systems in-use, and how the procedure compares to conventional techniques are outlined. Furthermore, the feasibility of cholecystoscopy and advanced gallbladder interventions is explored. Finally, a comparison in outcomes of EUS-GBD versus laparoscopic CCY is provided giving some initial data in support of the procedure as an alternative to surgery in a selected group of patients.

Permanent endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage using a novel spiral stent (IYO-stent)

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETGBD) is widely performed. However, there is no consensus on the appropriate diameter, length, and shape of the stent that should be used in this procedure. In addition, there are limited data on the outcomes of permanent ETGBD. In our facility, a stent with a novel spiral structure (IYO-stent) is permanently placed in patients with acute cholecystitis who are not indicated for surgery. This study examined the efficacy and safety of the IYO-stent in cases of permanent ETGBD.

METHODS

We retrospectively examined patients who underwent permanent ETGBD using the IYO-stent from April 2018 to December 2020.

RESULTS

Eleven patients were included in this study. The technical success and the clinical success rate were 91%. One patient had a post-procedure adverse event (post-endoscopic sphincterotomy bleeding). Within the median observation period of 312 days (range: 109-742), late adverse events, including cholangitis (n = 1) and incomplete stent migration (n = 1), were observed. However, none of the patients experienced cholecystitis relapse.

CONCLUSION

Permanent ETGBD with IYO-stent is an effective treatment for the patients with acute cholecystitis who are not indicated for surgery.

Current status of endoscopic management of cholecystitis

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy remains the standard treatment for acute cholecystitis (AC) although it is always not suitable for patients who are poor candidates for surgery. Recently, endoscopic gallbladder (GB) drainage was found to be a potentially revolutionary alternative for cholecystectomy for the control of symptoms, definitive treatment, or bridging therapy until surgery is possible. Two endoscopic methods have been established using either the trans-mural or trans-papillary drainage approach. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided GB drainage (EUS-GBD; trans-mural approach) is a novel technique that allows stent placement between the GB and duodenum or stomach via fistula track, effectively enabling GB drainage. For endoscopic trans-papillary GB drainage (ETGBD; trans-papillary approach), attempts of selective cannulation to the cystic duct should be made to place the stent in the same manner as an endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography. In comparison, EUS-GBD has higher clinical success and lower recurrence rates than ETGBD due to the use of larger-caliber stents, which allow for effective drainage when performed by skilled practitioners at high-volume centers. Advantages of ETGBD over EUS-GBD include more affordable costs and physiologic drainage, which preserves naive anatomy for possible future cholecystectomy. Although the field of endoscopic treatment for AC is rapidly advancing, important questions regarding which method improves clinical outcomes and safety more effectively remain unaddressed. Herein, the current status of endoscopic treatment for AC, including a technical review on clinical outcomes, adverse events, and advantages and disadvantages of each technique are reviewed, as well as other future prospects.

Subtotal Cholecystectomy Results in High Peri-operative Morbidity and Its Risk-Profile Should be Emphasised During Consent

BACKGROUND

Subtotal cholecystectomy aims to reduce the likelihood of bile duct injury but risks a multitude of less severe, yet significant complications. The primary aim of the present study was to report peri-operative outcomes of subtotal laparoscopic cholecystectomy (SLC) relative to total laparoscopic cholecystectomy (TLC) to inform the consent process.

METHOD

All laparoscopic cholecystectomies between 2015 and 2020 in one health board were included. The peri-operative outcomes of SLC (n = 87) and TLC (n = 2650) were reported. Pre-operative variables were compared between the two groups to identify risk factors for SLC. The outcomes between the SLC and TLC were compared using univariate, multivariate and propensity analysis.

RESULTS

Risk factors for SLC included higher age, male gender, cholecystitis, increased biliary admissions, ERCP, cholecystostomy and emergency cholecystectomy. Following SLC, rates of post-operative complication (45.9%), imaging (37.9%) intervention (28.7%) and readmission (29.9%) were significant. The risk profile was vastly heightened compared to that of TLC: intra-operative complications (RR 9.0; p < 0.001), post-operative complications [bile leak (RR 58.9; p < 0.001), collection (RR 12.2; p < 0.001), retained stones (RR 7.2; p < 0.001) and pneumonia (RR 5.4; p < 0.001)], post-operative imaging (RR 4.4; p < 0.001), post-operative intervention (RR 12.3; p < 0.001), prolonged PLOS (RR 11.3; p < 0.001) and readmission (RR 4.5; p < 0.001). The findings were consistent using multivariate logistic regression and propensity analysis.

CONCLUSION

The relative morbidity associated with SLC is significant and high-risk patients should be counselled for the peri-operative morbidity of subtotal cholecystectomy.

Long-Term Outcomes of Endoscopic Gallbladder Drainage for Cholecystitis in Poor Surgical Candidates: An Updated Comprehensive Review

Laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the standard and fundamental treatment of choice for acute cholecystitis; however, there are cases in which patients may be poor surgical candidates due to advanced age, comorbidities, and/or general condition. The rate of recurrent cholecystitis is high in patients who are not surgically treated; therefore, the prevention of recurrence in this patient population is an important subject of investigation in the management of cholecystitis. Although it has recently been reported that long-term stent placement by endoscopic gallbladder stenting or endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage may reduce the recurrence rate, its efficacy and safety remain controversial. Additionally, details surrounding the long-term stent management of these treatment methods should be further investigated. In this review, we summarize the updated evidence regarding the usefulness of long-term stent placement with endoscopic gallbladder stenting or endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage as a preventive measure for recurrence of cholecystitis and discuss issues that should be addressed in future studies.

Efficacy and safety of conversion of percutaneous cholecystostomy to endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder stenting in high-risk surgical patients

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder stenting (ETGBS) has been used as an alternative to percutaneous cholecystostomy in patients with acute cholecystitis who are considered unfit for surgery. However, there are few data on the efficacy and safety of ETGBS replacement of percutaneous cholecystostomy in high-risk surgical patients. This study aimed to evaluate the feasibility, efficacy, and safety of ETGBS to replace percutaneous cholecystostomy in high-risk surgical patients.

METHODS

This single center retrospective study reviewed the data of patients who attempted ETGBS to replace percutaneous cholecystostomy between January 2017 and September 2019. The technical success, clinical success, adverse events, and stent patency were evaluated.

RESULTS

ETGBS was performed in 43 patients (24 male, mean age 80.7 ± 7.4 years) to replace percutaneous cholecystostomy due to high surgical risk. The technical success rate and clinical success rate were 97.7% (42/43) and 90.5% (38/42), respectively. Procedure-related adverse events and stent-related late adverse events occurred in 7.0% (3/43) and 11.6% (5/43), respectively. Of the patients who successfully underwent ETGBS (n = 42), only one had recurrent acute cholecystitis during follow-up. The median stent patency was 415 days (interquartile range 240-528 days).

CONCLUSIONS

ETGBS, as a secondary intervention for the purpose of internalizing gallbladder drainage in patients following placement of a percutaneous cholecystostomy, is safe, effective, and technically feasible. Thus, conversion of percutaneous cholecystostomy to ETGBS may be considered as a viable option in high-risk surgical patients.

Endoscopic therapies for gallbladder drainage

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Endoscopic management of acute cholecystitis has expanded in patients who are considered nonoperative candidates. Traditionally managed with percutaneous cholecystostomy (PC), improvement in techniques and devices has led to increased use of endoscopic methods for gallbladder drainage. This document reviews technical aspects of endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ET-GBD) and EUS-guided GBD (EUS-GBD) as well as their respective technical/clinical success and adverse event rates. Available comparative data are also reviewed among nonsurgical gallbladder drainage techniques (PC, ET-GBD, and EUS-GBD).

METHODS

The MEDLINE database was searched through March 2021 for relevant articles by using keywords including "acute cholecystitis," "interventional EUS," "percutaneous cholecystostomy," "transpapillary gallbladder drainage," "EUS-guided gallbladder drainage," "lumen-apposing metal stent," "gallbladder stenting," and "endoscopic gallbladder drainage." The manuscript was drafted by 2 authors and reviewed by members of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Technology Committee and subsequently by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Governing Board.

RESULTS

Multiple studies have demonstrated acceptable outcomes comparing PC and both endoscopic gallbladder drainage techniques, ET-GBD and EUS-GBD. Published data suggest that endoscopic gallbladder drainage techniques may be associated with lower rates of adverse events and improved quality of life. However, there are important clinical considerations for choosing among these treatment options, requiring a multidisciplinary and collaborative approach to therapeutic decision-making in these patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of EUS-GBD and ET-GBD in high-risk surgical patients with acute cholecystitis may result in favorable outcomes when compared with PC. Further improvements in techniques and training should lead to more widespread acceptance and dissemination of these treatment options.

Efficacy and safety of endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage in acute cholecystitis: An updated meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage has been the most frequently performed treatment for acute cholecystitis for patients who are not candidates for surgery. Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETGBD) has evolved into an alternative treatment. There have been numerous retrospective and prospective studies evaluating ETGBD for acute cholecystitis, though results have been variable.

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of ETGBD in the treatment of inoperable patients with acute cholecystitis.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of major literature databases including PubMed, OVID, Science Direct, Google Scholar (from inception to March 2021) to identify studies reporting technical and clinical success, and post procedure adverse events in ETGBD. Weighted pooled rates were then calculated using fixed effects models for technical and clinical success, and post procedure adverse events, including recurrent cholecystitis.

RESULTS

We found 21 relevant articles that were then included in the study. In all 1307 patients were identified. The pooled technical success rate was 82.62% [95% confidence interval (CI): 80.63-84.52]. The pooled clinical success rate was found to be 94.87% (95%CI: 93.54-96.05). The pooled overall complication rate was 8.83% (95%CI: 7.42-10.34). Pooled rates of post procedure adverse events were bleeding 1.03% (95%CI: 0.58-1.62), perforation 0.78% (95%CI: 0.39-1.29), peritonitis/bile leak 0.45% (95%CI: 0.17-0.87), and pancreatitis 1.98% (95%CI: 1.33-2.76). The pooled rates of stent occlusion and migration were 0.39% (95%CI: 0.13-0.78) and 1.3% (95%CI: 0.75-1.99) respectively. The pooled rate of cholecystitis recurrence following ETGBD was 1.48% (95%CI: 0.92-2.16).

CONCLUSION

Our meta-analysis suggests that ETGBD is a feasible and efficacious treatment for inoperable patients with acute cholecystitis.

Endoscopic gallbladder drainage for symptomatic gallbladder disease: a cumulative systematic review meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided transmural or endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC)-based transpapillary drainage may provide alternative treatment strategies for high-risk surgical candidates with symptomatic gallbladder (GB) disease. The primary aim of this study was to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and safety of endoscopic GB drainage for patients with symptomatic GB disease.

METHODS

Searches of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were performed in accordance with PRISMA and MOOSE guidelines. Pooled proportions were calculated for measured outcomes including technical success, clinical success, adverse event rate, recurrence rate, and rate of reintervention. Subgroup analyses were performed for transmural versus transpapillary, transmural lumen apposing stent (LAMS), and comparison to percutaneous transhepatic drainage. Heterogeneity was assessed with I² statistics. Publication bias was ascertained by funnel plot and Egger regression testing.

RESULTS

Thirty-six studies (n = 1538) were included. Overall, endoscopic GB drainage achieved a technical and clinical success of 87.33% [(95% CI 84.42-89.77); I² = 39.55] and 84.16% [(95% CI 80.30-87.38); I² = 52.61], with an adverse event rate of 11.00% [(95% CI 9.25-13.03); I² = 7.08]. On subgroup analyses, EUS-guided transmural compared to ERC-assisted transpapillary drainage resulted in higher technical and clinical success rates [OR 3.91 (95% CI 1.52-10.09); P = 0.005 and OR 4.59 (95% CI 1.84-11.46); P = 0.001] and lower recurrence rate [OR 0.17 (95% CI 0.06-0.52); P = 0.002]. Among EUS-guided LAMS studies, technical success was 94.65% [(95% CI 91.54-96.67); I² = 0.00], clinical success was 92.06% [(95% CI 88.65-94.51); I² = 0.00], and adverse event rate was 11.71% [(95% CI 8.92-15.23); I² = 0.00]. Compared to percutaneous drainage, EUS-guided drainage possessed a similar efficacy and safety with significantly lower rate of reintervention [OR 0.05 (95% CI 0.02-0.13); P < 0.001].

DISCUSSION

Endoscopic GB drainage is a safe and effective treatment for high-risk surgical candidates with symptomatic GB disease. EUS-guided transmural drainage is superior to transpapillary drainage and associated with a lower rate of reintervention compared to percutaneous transhepatic drainage.

Endoscopic Transpapillary Gallbladder Drainage for Acute Cholecystitis

The mainstay of management of acute cholecystitis has been surgical, with percutaneous gallbladder drainage in patients deemed high risk for surgical intervention. Endoscopic management of acute cholecytitis with transpapillary and transmural drainage of the gall bladder is emerging as a viable alternative in high-risk surgical patients. In this article, we discuss the background, current status, technical challenges and strategies to overcome them, adverse events, and outcomes of endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage for management of acute cholecystitis.

Permanent endoscopic gallbladder stenting versus removal of gallbladder drainage, long-term outcomes after management of acute cholecystitis in high-risk surgical patients for cholecystectomy: Multi-center retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (EGBD) has been reported as an effective gallbladder drainage treatment option for acute cholecystitis in high-risk surgical patients. However, the long-term outcomes such as cholecystitis' recurrence rate after placement of EGB stenting (EGBS) have not been well studied yet.

AIMS

The aim of the present study was to compare the long-term outcome of EGBS and removal of gallbladder drainage after percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PTGBD) or endoscopic nasogallbladder drainage (ENGBD) for acute cholecystitis in high-risk surgical patients and clarify the usefulness of long-term placement of EGBS.

METHODS

We retrospectively studied 180 high-risk surgical patients with acute cholecystitis between January 2010 and December 2018. The patients were divided into two groups: EGBS group (long-term placement of EGBS) or Removal group (removal of drainage tube after PTGBD or ENGBD). Clinical outcomes, including long-term results, were compared between the groups.

RESULTS

The cumulative late adverse event (AE) rates were 5.0% and 22.1% in the EGBS and Removal group (P = .002), with a median follow-up period of 375 and 307 days in the two groups, respectively. The cumulative cholecystitis recurrence rate was 5.0% (2/40) in the EGBS group and 16% (21/131) in the Removal group (P = .024), respectively. In the multivariate analysis for late AE, only EGBS was an independent risk factor with a decreasing value.

CONCLUSION

The permanent EGBS in high-risk surgical patients with acute cholecystitis was considered effective in reducing the risk of late AE.

The evaluation of ENGBD versus PTGBD in high-risk acute cholecystitis: A single-center prospective randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Gallbladder drainage plays a key role in the management of acute cholecystitis (AC) patients. Percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PTGBD) is commonly used while endoscopic naso-gallbladder drainage (ENGBD) serves as an alternative.

METHODS

A single center, prospective randomized controlled trial was performed. Eligible AC patients were randomly assigned to ENGBD or PTGBD group. Randomization was a computer-generated list with 1:1 allocation. All patients received cholecystectomy 2-3 months after drainage. The primary endpoint was abdominal pain score, and the intention-to-treat population was analyzed. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03701464).

FINDINGS

Between Oct 1, 2018 and Feb 29, 2020, 22 out of 61 consecutive AC patients were enrolled in the final analysis. The mean abdominal pain scores before drainage, and at 24, 48, and 72 h after drainage in ENGBD were 6.9 ± 1.1, 4.3 ± 1.2, 2.2 ± 0.8 and 1.5 ± 0.5, respectively, while those of PTGBD were 7.4 ± 1.2, 6.2 ± 1.2, 5.3 ± 1.0 and 3.7 ± 0.9; and the mean gallbladder area tenderness scores were 8.4 ± 1.2, 5.7 ± 0.9, 3.5 ± 0.7, 2.5 ± 0.5 for ENGBD and 8.6 ± 0.9, 7.3 ± 1.0, 7.4 ± 0.5, 4.8 ± 0.9 for PTGBD. The mean abdominal pain and gallbladder area tenderness scores of the ENGBD significantly decreased than the PTGBD (group × time interaction P<0.001, respectively). ENGBD group presented lower post-operative hemorrhage and abdominal drainage tube placement rates (median (IQR) 15[5-20] vs 40[20-70]ml, 3vs9, P = 0.03), and pathological grade and lymphocyte count were observed (P = 0.004) between groups. No adverse events were observed in 3 months follow-up.

INTERPRETATION

Compared to PTGBD, ENGBD group presented less pain, better gallbladder pathological grades and less surgical difficulties during cholecystectomy procedures.

FUNDING

National Natural Science Foundation of China (82060551).

Endoscopic transpapillary stenting for the management of acute cholecystitis

INTRODUCTION

Cholecystectomy is the gold standard treatment of acute cholecystitis. Patients who are considered not to be candidates for cholecystectomy are commonly recommended to undergo percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PTGBD) tube placement; however, external drainage is undesirable for many patients. Endoscopic transpapillary stent placement (ETSP) has been described as an alternative method for decompression of the gallbladder. Data in support of this technique is limited to a handful of observational studies with variable indications. Our study sought to expand on the available data for the use of ETSP exclusively in the context of acute cholecystitis.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective chart review of patients with cholecystitis who underwent ETSP at our institution between January 2012 and July 2018. We collected data on indication, comorbidities, length of stay, laboratory values, outcomes, additional procedures, and whether cholecystectomy was eventually performed.

RESULTS

During the study period, 12 patients underwent ETSP. The mean age was 68.2 years (± SD 12.4) with an average Anesthesia Society Assessment (ASA) class of 3.2. The Charlson Comorbidity Index was greater than seven in 75% of patients, indicating a 0% estimated 10-year survival. The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) surgical risk calculator was used to estimate an average mortality risk for laparoscopic cholecystectomy of 4.8% (± 3.3, 95% CI) in our study population; the estimated risk in the general population is 0.1%. Immediate resolution of symptoms with endoscopic drainage was achieved in 11 of 12 patients (91.7%); one patient experienced no symptom resolution with endoscopic drainage nor subsequent PTGBD tube placement. Six of 12 (50%) patients experienced recurrence of symptoms requiring hospitalization, and two of 12 patients (16.7%) died secondary to biliary sepsis.

CONCLUSION

Endoscopic transpapillary stent placement is an alternative method for the management of acute cholecystitis patients who are not candidates for surgery. ETSP has a high technical success rate; however, it may result in a high rate of symptom recurrence and should only be utilized in select patients. Randomized studies would be beneficial to further investigate the utility and safety of ETSP in the management of acute cholecystitis.

EUS-guided versus endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage in high-risk surgical patients with acute cholecystitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

In patients with acute cholecystitis who are deemed high risk for cholecystectomy, percutaneous cholecystostomy (PC) was historically performed for gallbladder drainage (GBD). There are several limitations associated with PC. Endoscopic GBD [Endoscopic transpapillary GBD (ET-GBD) and EUS-guided GBD (EUS-GBD)] is an alternative to PC. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the effectiveness and safety of EUS-GBD versus ET-GBD.

METHODS

We performed a systematic search of multiple databases through May 2019 to identify studies that compared outcomes of EUS-GBD versus ET-GBD in the management of acute cholecystitis in high-risk surgical patients. Pooled odds ratios (OR) of technical success, clinical success and adverse events between EUS-GBD and ET-GBD groups were calculated.

RESULTS

Five studies with a total of 857 patients (EUS-GBD vs ET-GBD: 259 vs 598 patients) were included in the analysis. EUS-GBD was associated with higher technical [pooled OR 5.22 (95% CI 2.03-13.44; p = 0.0006; I² = 20%)] and clinical success [pooled OR 4.16 (95% CI 2.00-8.66; p = 0.0001; I² = 19%)] compared to ET-GBD. There was no statistically significant difference in the rate of overall adverse events [pooled OR 1.30 (95% CI 0.77-2.22; p = 0.33, I² = 0%)]. EUS-GBD was associated with lower rate of recurrent cholecystitis [pooled OR 0.33 (95% CI 0.14-0.79; p = 0.01; I² = 0%)]. There was low heterogeneity in the analyses.

CONCLUSION

EUS-GBD has higher rate of technical and clinical success compared to ET-GBD. While the rates of overall adverse events are statistically similar, EUS-GBD has lower rate of recurrent cholecystitis. Hence, EUS-GBD is preferable to ET-GBD for endoscopic management of acute cholecystitis in select high-risk surgical patients.

Current Status in the Treatment of Acute Cholecystitis Patients Receiving Antithrombotic Therapy: Is Endoscopic Drainage Feasible?- A Systematic Review

The bleeding complication risk of surgery or percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PTGBD) may increase in patients with acute cholecystitis receiving antithrombotic therapy (ATT). Endoscopic gallbladder drainage (EGBD) may be recommended for such patients. English articles published between 1991 and 2018 in peer-reviewed journals that discuss cholecystectomy, PTGBD, and EGBD in patients with ATT or coagulopathy were reviewed to assess the safety of the procedures, especially in terms of the bleeding complication. There were 8 studies on cholecystectomy, 3 on PTGBD, and 1 on endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETGBD) in patients receiving ATT. With respect to EGBD, 28 studies on ETGBD (including 1 study already mentioned above) and 26 studies on endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) were also analyzed. The overall bleeding complication rate in patients with ATT who underwent cholecystectomy was significantly higher than that in patients without ATT (6.5% [23/354] vs. 1.2% [26/2,224], p<0.001). However, the bleeding risk of cholecystectomy and PTGBD in patients receiving ATT was controversial. The overall technical success, clinical success, and bleeding complication rates of ETGBD vs. EUS-GBD were 84% vs. 96% (p<0.001), 92% vs. 97% (p<0.001), and 0.65% vs. 2.1% (p=0.005), respectively. One patient treated with ETGBD experienced bleeding complication among 191 patients with bleeding tendency. ETGBD may be an ideal drainage procedure for patients receiving ATT from the viewpoint of bleeding, although EUS-GBD is also efficacious.

Cholécystite aiguë de réanimation

La cholécystite aiguë de réanimation (0,2 à 1 % des patients) est liée à des facteurs de risque spécifiques (jeûne, nutrition parentérale, ventilation mécanique) et systémiques (instabilité, brûlures graves, catécholamines) conduisant à des phénomènes d’ischémie-reperfusion de la paroi vésiculaire, à l’origine d’une cholécystite classiquement alithiasique. Toutefois, les données récentes retrouvent une participation lithiasique dans 50%des cas environ. Il s’agit d’une maladie grave dont le diagnostic est difficile et la mortalité élevée (40 %). Chez ces patients graves, aucun critère clinicobiologique ne permet un diagnostic de certitude. L’imagerie du patient de réanimation peut être prise à défaut par les anomalies fréquemment retrouvées en réanimation ; les signes les plus évocateurs sont un épaississement pariétal vésiculaire supérieur à 4 mm, un hydrocholécyste ou un défaut de rehaussement de la paroi au scanner. Le traitement en urgence repose sur une antibiothérapie à large spectre ciblée sur les germes digestifs et nosocomiaux ainsi que sur une optimisation hémodynamique. La cholécystectomie (laparoscopique, voire sous-costale) représente le traitement de référence en empêchant la récidive. Mais la gravité des patients amène souvent à envisager une solution moins lourde que la chirurgie avec un drainage de la vésicule. Le drainage par voie percutanée est l’alternative de choix en raison de sa disponibilité et de son efficacité, il existe toutefois un risque théorique de récidive à l’ablation du drain, surtout en cas de cholécystite lithiasique. Le drainage interne par voie endoscopique (transpapillaire ou transdigestif) est une possibilité prometteuse, mais réservée à l’heure actuelle aux centres experts.

Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder stenting using a newly designed plastic stent for acute cholecystitis

Background and study aims Biliary plastic stents are generally substituted for gallbladder stents in endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder stenting (EGBS), there is no sufficient evidence about what type of plastic stent is suitable. We examined outcomes of EGBS using standard biliary stents and a novel stent for acute cholecystitis and evaluated the efficacy of the novel stent.

Patients and methods Seventy patients with acute cholecystitis in whom EGBS was performed were evaluated retrospectively. We performed EGBS in 23 patients using the novel stent (novel stent group) and 47 patients using standard biliary stents (pigtail: 35, straight: 12) (control group). In the two groups, we examined outcomes of EGBS.

Results There were no significant differences in patient backgrounds or rates of technical success, clinical success, or early adverse events (AE) between the novel stent group and the control groups. However, rates of late AEs were 4.3 % in the novel stent group (liver abscess: 1) and 40.4 % in the control group (stent migration: 15, recurrence of cholecystitis: 4), indicating a significantly higher rate in the control group (P = 0.004). The rate of stent migration was significantly higher in the control group (P = 0.006). Multivariate analysis identified a straight type stent as the risk factor for stent migration (odds ratio: 8.81, 95 % confidence interval: 1.66 – 46.83).

Conclusions The novel stent had significantly lower rates of late AEs and stent migration. Thus, for long-term stent placement, the novel stent was more effective than traditional biliary stents.

Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography and Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Gallbladder Drainage

"Gallbladder disease is one of the most common gastrointestinal diseases encountered in clinical practice. Surgical removal and percutaneous drainage are both widely available and effective in the management of acute cholecystitis. Several endoscopic approaches exist as an alternative to these interventions. These include transpapillary approaches via endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), transmural drainage and access approaches via endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), and endoscopic surgical approaches using natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery (NOTES) techniques. This article reviews the epidemiology and pathophysiology of gallbladder diseases and discusses the various percutaneous, surgical, and endoscopic approaches to managing gallbladder disease."

Endoscopic ultrasound guided gallbladder drainage - is it ready for prime time?

Management of acute cholecystitis includes initial stabilization and antibiotics. However, the most definitive treatment is cholecystectomy. A small percentage of patients who are not suitable for surgery due to the severity of cholecystitis or comorbidities will require a temporary measure as a bridge to surgery or permanent nonoperative management to decrease the mortality and morbidity. Most of these patients who require conservative management were managed with percutaneous transhepatic cholecystostomy or trans-papillary drainage of gallbladder drainage with cystic duct stenting through endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreaticography (ERCP). Although, these conservative measures are effective, they can cause significant discomfort to the patients especially if used as a long-term measure. In view of this, there is a need for further minimally invasive procedures, which is safe, effective and comfortable to patients. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guided gallbladder drainage is a novel method of gallbladder drainage first described in 2007^[1]. Over the last decade, EUS guided gallbladder drainage has evolved as an effective alternative to percutaneous cholecystostomy and trans-papillary gallbladder drainage. Our goal is to review available literature regarding the scope of EUS guided gallbladder drainage as a viable alternative to percutaneous cholecystostomy or cystic duct stenting through ERCP among patients who are not suitable for cholecystectomy.

Recent advances in management of acalculous cholecystitis

Acalculous cholecystitis is a life-threatening gallbladder infection that typically affects the critically ill. A late diagnosis can have devastating outcomes because of the high risk of gallbladder perforation if untreated. The diagnosis is not straightforward as Murphy’s sign is difficult to illicit in the critically ill and many imaging findings are either insensitive or non-specific. This article reviews the current imaging literature to improve the interpretation of findings. Management involves a percutaneous cholecystostomy, surgical cholecystectomy, or more recently an endoscopically placed metal stent through the gastrointestinal tract into the gallbladder. This article reviews the current literature assessing the outcomes of each treatment option and suggests a protocol in determining the modality of choice on the basis of patient population. Specifically, endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage is a novel drainage approach for patients who are poor candidates for surgery and obviates the need for a percutaneous drain and all its complications. It has promising results but has caveats in its uses.

Comparable efficacy of endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage and percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage in acute cholecystitis

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

 Although endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETGBD) is reportedly useful in patients who have acute cholecystitis, its efficacy has not been compared to that of percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PTGBD). We retrospectively compared the efficacy and safety of ETGBD and PTGBD in patients with acute cholecystitis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

 We studied 75 patients who required gallbladder drainage for acute cholecystitis between January 2014 and December 2016. Using propensity score matching analysis, we compared the clinical efficacy and length of hospitalization in patients successfully treated with ETGBD and PTGBD. Moreover, we assessed the predictive factors for hospitalization period < 30 days using multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

ETGBD and PTGBD were successfully performed in 33 patients (77 %) and 42 patients (100 %) ( P  < 0.001). Twenty-seven matched pairs were obtained after propensity score matching analysis. No significant differences were observed between patients treated with ETGBD and those treated with PTGBD with respect to improvement in white blood cell count and serum C-reactive protein level. The length of hospitalization in patients treated with ETGBD was significantly shorter than in those treated with PTGBD regardless of the need for surgery. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed ETGBD (odds ratio, 7.07; 95 % confidence interval 2.22 - 22.46) and surgery (odds ratio 0.26; 95 % confidence interval 0.09 - 0.79) as independent factors associated with hospitalization period. There were no significant differences in occurrence of complications in ETGBD and PTGBD procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

ETGBD was shown to be as useful as PTGBD for treatment of acute cholecystitis and was associated with shorter hospitalization period. ETGBD can be an alternative treatment option for acute cholecystitis at times when PTGBD is not possible.

Management of acute cholecystitis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Various aspects of the management of acute calculous cholecystitis, including type and timing of surgery, role of antibiotics, and nonoperative management, remain controversial. This review focuses on recently published studies addressing the timing of cholecystectomy, use of cholecystostomy tubes, and role of antibiotics in this condition.

RECENT FINDINGS

In most cases, the diagnosis of acute cholecystitis can be initially confirmed with an abdominal ultrasound. Early laparoscopic cholecystectomy (within 24-72 h of symptom onset) is better than delayed surgery (>7 days) for most patients with grade I and II diseases. Percutaneous cholecystostomy and novel endoscopic gallbladder drainage interventions may be used as a temporizing measure or as definitive therapy in those who are too sick to undergo surgery. Studies are conflicting as to whether antibiotics are required for the treatment of uncomplicated cases.

SUMMARY

Cholecystectomy remains the only definitive therapy for acute cholecystitis. Current guidelines recommend treatment on the basis of disease severity at presentation. Antibiotics and a variety of minimally invasive nonsurgical interventions, although not definitive, play an adjunctive role in the management of the disease.

Recent Advances in Endoscopy

In this narrative review, invited by the Editors of Gastroenterology, we summarize recent advances in the field of gastrointestinal endoscopy. We have chosen articles published primarily in the past 2-3 years. Although a thorough literature review was performed for each topic, the nature of the article is subjective and systematic and is based on the authors' experience and expertise regarding articles we believed were most likely to be of high clinical and scientific importance.

Similar Efficacies of Endoscopic Ultrasound Gallbladder Drainage With a Lumen-Apposing Metal Stent Versus Percutaneous Transhepatic Gallbladder Drainage for Acute Cholecystitis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Acute cholecystitis in patients who are not candidates for surgery is often managed with percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PT-GBD). Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) with a lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) is an effective alternative to PT-GBD. We compared the technical success of EUS-GBD versus PT-GBD, and patient outcomes, numbers of adverse events (AEs), length of hospital stay, pain scores, and repeat interventions.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study to compare EUS-GBD versus PT-GBD at 7 centers (5 in the United States, 1 in Europe, and 1 in Asia), from 2013 through 2015, in management of acute cholecystitis in patients who are not candidates for surgery. A total of 90 patients (56 men) with acute cholecystitis (61 calculous, 29 acalculous) underwent EUS-GBD (n = 45) or PT-GBD (n = 45). Data were collected on technical success, clinical success (resolution of symptoms or laboratory and/or radiologic abnormalities within 3 days of intervention), and need for repeat intervention. Characteristics were compared using Student t tests for continuous variables and the chi-square test, or the Fisher exact test, when appropriate, for categorical variables. Adverse events were graded according to American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy definitions and compared using the Fisher exact test. Postprocedure pain scores were compared using the Mann-Whitney U test.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics, type, and clinical severity of cholecystitis were comparable between groups. In the EUS-GBD group, noncautery LAMS were used in 30 patients and cautery-enhanced LAMS were used in 15. Technical success was achieved for 98% of patients in the EUS-GBD and 100% of the patients in the PT-GBD group (P = .88). Clinical success was achieved by 96% of patients in the EUS-GBD group and 91% in the PT-GBD group (P = .20). There was a nonsignificant trend toward fewer AEs in the EUS-GBD group (5 patients; 11%) than in the PT-GBD group (14 patients; 32%) (P = .065). There were no significant differences in the severity of the AEs: mild, 2 in the EUS-GBD group versus 5 in the PT-GBD group (P = .27); moderate, 4 versus 3 (P = .98); severe, 1 versus 3 (P = .62); or deaths, 1 versus 3 (P = .61). The mean postprocedure pain score was lower in the EUS-GBD group than in the PT-GBD group (2.5 vs 6.5; P < .05). The EUS-GBD group had a shorter average length of stay in the hospital (3 days) than the PT-GBD group (9 days) (P < .05) and fewer repeat interventions (11 vs 112) (P < .05). The average number of repeat interventions per patients was 0.2 ± 0.4 EUS-GBD group versus 2.5 ± 2.8 in the PT-GBD group (P < .05). Median follow-up after drainage was comparable in EUS-GBD group (215 days; range, 1-621 days) versus the PT-GBD group (265 days; range, 1-1638 days).

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-GBD has similar technical and clinical success compared with PT-GBD and should be considered an alternative for patients who are not candidates for surgery. Patients who undergo EUS-GBD seem to have shorter hospital stays, lower pain scores, and fewer repeated interventions, with a trend toward fewer AEs. A prospective, comparative study is needed to confirm these results.

Efficacy and safety of endoscopic gallbladder drainage in acute cholecystitis: Is it better than percutaneous gallbladder drainage?

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The efficacy and safety of endoscopic gallbladder drainage (EGBD) performed via endoscopic retrograde cholangiography (ERC)-based transpapillary stenting or EUS-based transmural stenting are unknown. We aimed to conduct a proportion meta-analysis to evaluate the cumulative efficacy and safety of these procedures and to compare them with percutaneous gallbladder drainage (PGBD).

METHODS

We searched several databases from inception through December 10, 2015 to identify studies (with 10 or more patients) reporting technical success and postprocedure adverse events of EGBD. Weighted pooled rates (WPRs) for technical and clinical success, postprocedure adverse events, and recurrent cholecystitis were calculated for both methods of EGBD. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) were also calculated to compare the technical success and postprocedure adverse events in patients undergoing EGBD versus PGBD.

RESULTS

The WPRs with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of technical success, clinical success, postprocedure adverse events, and recurrent cholecystitis for ERC-based transpapillary drainage were 83% (95% CI, 78%-87%; I² = 38%), 93% (95% CI, 89%-96%; I² = 39%), 10% (95% CI, 7%-13%; I² = 27%), and 3% (95% CI, 1%-5%; I² = 0%), respectively. The WPRs for EUS-based drainage for technical success, clinical success, postprocedure adverse events, and recurrent cholecystitis were 93% (95% CI, 87%-96%; I² = 0%), 97% (95% CI, 93%-99%; I² = 0%), 13% (95% CI, 8%-19%; I² = 0%), and 4% (95% CI, 2%-9%; I² = 0%), respectively. On proportionate difference, EUS-based drainage had better technical (10%) and clinical success (4%) in comparison with ERC-based drainage. The pooled OR for technical success of EGBD versus PGBD was .51 (95% CI, .09-2.88; I² = 23%) and for postprocedure adverse events was .33 (95% CI, .14-.80; I² = 16%) in favor of EGBD.

CONCLUSIONS

EGBD is an efficacious and safe therapeutic modality for treatment of patients with acute cholecystitis who cannot undergo surgery. EGBD shows a similar technical success as PGBD but appears to be safer than PGBD.