Safety and efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage combined with endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in the same session

Laparoscopic vs open approach for acute cholecystitis in octogenarians. A prospective multicenter observational nationwide study

BACKGROUND

The world population is aging, with octogenarians expected to reach over 400 million by 2050. Acute cholecystitis is a serious complication in the elderly. Age is not a contraindication for emergency cholecystectomy, an option that can both save lives and preserve quality of life.

METHODS

The present study aimed to compare open and laparoscopic surgical approaches. Over six months, 38 emergency surgery units enrolled all consecutive octogenarians with acute cholecystitis undergoing cholecystectomy. Postoperative outcomes were compared after propensity score matching analysis.

RESULTS

The study included 212 patients (84 years [81-86], 47.2% women). The open approach was used in 32.1% of patients, and the laparoscopic approach in 67.9%. After propensity score matching, a decrease in hospital stays (open, 8 days [6-13]; laparoscopic, 5 days [4-8]; P < .001), 30-day morbidity (open, 48.5%; laparoscopic, 26.5%; P = .01), and 30-day mortality (open, 13.2%, laparoscopic, 1.5%; P = .02) was found. Among the specific postoperative complications, a decrease in septicemia (open, 14.7%; laparoscopic, 0%; P = .001) was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic approach was used in two out of three octogenarians. After propensity score matching, octogenarians undergoing laparoscopic approach had shorter length of hospital stay, fewer 30-day postoperative complications, fewer episodes of septicemia, and less 30-day mortality than octogenarians undergoing open approach. These findings suggest that the laparoscopic approach may be the preferred choice for octogenarians with acute cholecystitis undergoing cholecystectomy.

Role of advanced endoscopy in the management of inflammatory digestive diseases (pancreas and biliary tract)

The progress of endoscopic diagnosis and treatment for inflammatory diseases of the biliary tract and pancreas have been remarkable. Endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) and EUS-elastography are used for the diagnosis of early chronic pancreatitis and evaluation of endocrine and exocrine function in chronic pancreatitis. Notably, extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and electrohydraulic shock wave lithotripsy have improved the endoscopic stone removal rate in patients for whom pancreatic stone removal is difficult. Studies have reported the use of self-expanding metal stents for stent placement for pancreatic duct stenosis and EUS-guided pancreatic drainage for refractory pancreatic duct strictures. Furthermore, EUS-guided drainage using a double-pigtailed plastic stent has been performed for the management of symptomatic pancreatic fluid collection after acute pancreatitis. Recently, lumen-apposing metal stents have led to advances in the treatment of walled-off necrosis after acute pancreatitis. EUS-guided biliary drainage is an alternative to refractory endoscopic biliary drainage and percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage for the treatment of acute cholangitis. The placement of an inside stent followed by switching to uncovered self-expanding metal stents in difficult-to-treat cases has been proposed for acute cholangitis by malignant biliary obstruction. Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage is an alternative to percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage for severe and some cases of moderate acute cholecystitis. EUS-guided gallbladder drainage has been reported as an alternative to percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage and endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage. However, it is important to understand the advantages and disadvantages of each drainage method and select the optimal drainage method for each case.

Endoscopic Gallbladder Drainage: A Comprehensive Review on Indications, Techniques, and Future Perspectives

In recent years, therapeutic endoscopy has become a fundamental tool in the management of gallbladder diseases in light of its minimal invasiveness, high clinical efficacy, and good safety profile. Both endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (TGBD) and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) provide effective internal drainage in patients with acute cholecystitis unfit for cholecystectomy, avoiding the drawbacks of external percutaneous gallbladder drainage (PGBD). The availability of dedicated lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) for EUS-guided transluminal interventions contributed to the expansion of endoscopic therapies for acute cholecystitis, making endoscopic gallbladder drainage easier, faster, and hence more widely available. Moreover, EUS-GBD with LAMS opened the possibility of several cholecystoscopy-guided interventions, such as gallstone lithotripsy and clearance. Finally, EUS-GBD has also been proposed as a rescue drainage modality in malignant biliary obstruction after failure of standard techniques, with encouraging results. In this review, we will describe the TBGD and EUS-GBD techniques, and we will discuss the available data on clinical efficacy in different settings in comparison with PGBD. Finally, we will comment on the future perspectives of EUS-GBD, discussing the areas of uncertainty in which new data are more strongly awaited.

EUS-Guided Cholecystoduodenostomy for a Poor Surgical Candidate With Chronic Octreotide-Associated Gallstones From Metastatic Neuroendocrine Tumor

Chronic octreotide use has been associated with gallstone formation. Historically, cholecystectomy has been the defining treatment for those who have gallstone-related disease. For those who are poor surgical candidates, percutaneous and endoscopic approaches have been used. We describe the endoscopic management of a 74-year-old man with significant gallstone burden and associated sequelae because of chronic octreotide for metastatic neuroendocrine tumor through endoscopic ultrasound-guided cholecystoduodenostomy with gallstone extraction using lumen-apposing metal stents.

Endoscopic ultrasound in the management of acute cholecystitis: Practical review

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) has emerged over the last years as an alternative procedure to percutaneous drainage (PT)-GBD in patients with acute cholecystitis (AC) at high surgical risk. This process has been driven by the advent of lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) with electrocautery-enhanced capability, which has rendered the drainage procedure easier to accomplish and safer. Studies and meta-analyses have proven the superiority of EUS-GBD over PT-GBD in high-surgical-risk patients with AC. Little evidence exists in the same setting that EUS-GBD compares equally with laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). Moreover, EUS-GBD might theoretically have a possible role in patients at high surgical risk with an indication to undergo cholecystectomy or with a high probability of conversion from LC to open cholecystectomy. Properly designed studies are needed to better clarify the role of EUS-GBD in these patient populations.

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.

Lumen-apposing-metal stent misdeployment in endoscopic ultrasound-guided drainages: A systematic review focusing on issues and rescue management

BACKGROUND

The introduction of lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided drainages has marked a turning point in the field of interventional ultrasound and it is gathering worldwide diffusion in different clinical settings. Nevertheless, the procedure may conceal unexpected pitfalls. LAMS misdeployment is the most frequent cause of technical failure and it can be considered a procedure-related adverse event when it hampers the conclusion of the planned procedure or results in significant clinical consequences. Stent misdeployment can be managed successfully by endoscopic rescue maneuvers to allow the completion of the procedure. To date, no standardized indication is available to guide an appropriate rescue strategy depending on the type of procedure or of misdeployment.

AIM

To evaluate the incidence of LAMS misdeployment during EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy (EUS-CDS), gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) and pancreatic fluid collections drainage (EUS-PFC) and to describe the endoscopic rescue strategies adopted under the circumstance.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of the literature on PubMed by searching for studies published up to October 2022. The search was carried out using the exploded medical subject heading terms “lumen apposing metal stent”, “LAMS”, “endoscopic ultrasound” and “choledochoduodenostomy” or “gallbladder” or “pancreatic fluid collections”. We included in the review on-label EUS-guided procedures namely EUS-CDS, EUS-GBD and EUS-PFC. Only those publications reporting EUS-guided LAMS positioning were considered. The studies reporting a technical success rate of 100% and other procedure-related adverse events were considered to calculate the overall rate of LAMS misdeployment, while studies not reporting the causes of technical failure were excluded. Case reports were considered only for the extraction of data regarding the issues of misdeployment and rescue techniques. The following data were collected from each study: Author, year of publication, study design, study population, clinical indication, technical success, reported number of misdeployment, stent type and size, flange misdeployed and type of rescue strategy.

RESULTS

The overall technical success rate of EUS-CDS, EUS-GBD and EUS-PFC was 93.7%, 96.1%, and 98.1% respectively. Significant rates of LAMS misdeployment have been reported for EUS-CDS, EUS-GBD and EUS-PFC drainage, respectively 5.8%, 3.4%, and 2.0%. Endoscopic rescue treatment was feasible in 86.8%, 80%, and 96.8% of cases. Non endoscopic rescue strategies were required only in 10.3%, 16% and 3.2% for EUS-CDS, EUS-GBD, and EUS-PFC. The endoscopic rescue techniques described were over-the-wire deployment of a new stent through the created fistula tract in 44.1%, 8% and 64.5% and stent-in-stent in 23.5%, 60%, and 12.9%, respectively for EUS-CDS, EUS-GBD, and EUS-PFC. Further therapeutic option were endoscopic rendezvous in 11.8% of EUS-CDS and repeated procedure of EUS-guided drainage in 16.1% of EUS-PFC.

CONCLUSION

LAMS misdeployment is a relatively common adverse event in EUS-guided drainages. There is no consensus on the best rescue approach in these cases and the choice is often made by the endoscopist relying upon the clinical scenario, anatomical characteristics, and local expertise. In this review, we investigated the misdeployment of LAMS for each of the on-label indications focusing on the rescue therapies used, with the aim of providing useful data for endoscopists and to improve patient outcomes.

Current management of concomitant cholelithiasis and common bile duct stones

The management policy of concomitant cholelithiasis and choledocholithiasis is based on a one- or two-stage procedure. It basically includes either laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) with laparoscopic common bile duct (CBD) exploration (LCBDE) in the same operation or LC with preoperative, postoperative and even intraoperative endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-endoscopic sphincterotomy (ERCP-ES) for stone clearance. The most frequently used worldwide option is preoperative ERCP-ES and stone removal followed by LC, preferably on the next day. In cases where preoperative ERCP-ES is not feasible, the proposed alternative of intraoperative rendezvous ERCP-ES simultaneously with LC has been advocated. The intraoperative extraction of CBD stones is superior to postoperative rendezvous ERCP-ES. However, there is no consensus on the superiority of laparoendoscopic rendezvous. This is equivalent to a traditional two-stage procedure. Endoscopic papillary large balloon dilation reduces recurrence. LCBDE and intraoperative ERCP have similar good outcomes. The risk of recurrence after ERCP-ES is greater than that after LCBDE. Laparoscopic ultrasonography may delineate the anatomy and detect CBD stones. The majority of surgeons prefer the transcductal instead of the transcystic approach for CBDE with or without T-tube drainage, but the transcystic approach must be used where possible. LCBDE is a safe and effective choice when performed by an experienced surgeon. However, the requirement of specific equipment and advanced training are drawbacks. The percutaneous approach is an alternative when ERCP fails. Surgical or endoscopic reintervention for retained stones may be needed. For asymptomatic CBD stones, ERCP clearance is the first-choice method. Both one-stage and two-stage management are acceptable and can ensure improved quality of life.

Endoscopic Transpapillary Gallbladder Drainage for Recurrent Cholecystitis after Covered Self-expandable Metal Stent Placement for Unresectable Malignant Biliary Obstruction

A 76-year-old woman with advanced pancreatic cancer developed recurrent cholecystitis after covered self-expandable metal stent (CSEMS) placement. The cholecystitis was refractory to repeated percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PTGBD). Cholecystography showed a patent cystic duct with right and cranial side bifurcation, which is indicative of an increased likelihood of success of endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETGBD). We were able to manage the cholecystitis by ETGBD without further recurrence. ETGBD is considered an effective internal drainage method for the management of acute cholecystitis after CSEMS placement, and its indication may be decided on the basis of the findings of cholecystography through the PTGBD route.

Endoscopic ultrasound in the management of acute cholecystitis

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) is increasingly utilised for patients with acute cholecystitis who are high-risk candidates for surgery. The technique to perform EUS-GBD has evolved and matured over the last two decades since EUS-GBD was first described in 2007 using a nasobiliary catheter. Compared to percutaneous gallbladder drainage (PT-GBD), EUS-GBD offers benefits of shorter hospitalisation stay and lesser procedural pain and need for reintervention. The purpose of this review is to provide an updated review of the equipment and techniques available for EUS-GBD, outcomes of the procedure and how it compares against endoscopic transpapillary drainage (ET-GBD), PT-GBD and laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Controversies surrounding the procedure will also be discussed.

Same day endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography immediately after endoscopic ultrasound for choledocholithiasis is feasible, safe and cost-effective

BACKGROUND

Patients with suspected choledocholithiasis should undergo further confirmatory imaging test by endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) or magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) before performing definite extraction by endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Usually, those procedures are performed at a separate session.

AIM

The aim of our study is to report the safety, efficacy and cost-effectiveness of same day EUS and ERCP.

METHODS

A retrospective study including all patients who underwent EUS and ERCP for choledocholithiasis from 1st January 2020 through 1st January 2021. Patients were categorized into same day EUS and ERCP (group A) and separate day procedures (group B). Univariate descriptive analysis was done to compare between the groups and cost-effectiveness analysis was based on the length of hospitalization.

RESULTS

Sixty-one patients (57.5%) underwent same day EUS and ERCP (group A), as compared to 45 patients (42.5%) who had separate sessions (group B). The average ages in groups A and B were 66.1 ± 20.7 years and 65.8 ± 19.3 years, respectively (p = .47). There was no difference in the mean doses of midazolam, propofol and fentanyl in EUS and ERCP examinations in both groups. Notably, group A had a significantly lower hospitalization length as compared to group B (7.4 ± 2.9 vs. 9.7 ± 3.9 days, p = .0003). Consequently, same day EUS and ERCP was associated with a significant cost saving as compared to group B (7680.9$ ± 3071.4$vs 10089.4$±4053.4$, p = .0003), respectively. There was no serious anesthesia related adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Same day EUS and ERCP for choledocholithiasis was safe and cost-effective with significant lower hospitalization length.

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.

EUS and ERCP in the Same Session for Biliary Stones: From Risk Stratification to Treatment Strategy in Different Clinical Conditions

Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) with sphincterotomy and stone extraction is the treatment of choice for choledocholithiasis, reaching a successful clearance of the common bile duct (CBD) in up to 90% of the cases. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has the best diagnostic accuracy for CBD stones, its sensitivity and specificity range being 89-94% and 94-95%, respectively. Traditionally seen as two separate entities, the two worlds of EUS and ERCP have recently come together under the new discipline of bilio-pancreatic endoscopy. Nevertheless, the complexity of both EUS and ERCP led the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy to identify quality in endoscopy as a top priority in its recent EUS and ERCP curriculum recommendations. The clinical benefits of performing EUS and ERCP in the same session are several, such as benefiting from real-time information from EUS, having one single sedation for both the diagnosis and the treatment of biliary stones, reducing the risk of cholangitis/acute pancreatitis while waiting for ERCP after the EUS diagnosis, and ultimately shortening the hospital stay and costs while preserving patients' outcomes. Potential candidates for the same session approach include patients at high risk for CBD stones, symptomatic individuals with status post-cholecystectomy, pregnant women, and those unfit for surgery. This narrative review discusses the main technical aspects and evidence from the literature about EUS and ERCP in the management of choledocholithiasis.

Novel Uses of Lumen-apposing Metal Stents: A Review of the Literature

The field of therapeutic endoscopy has seen many recent advancements. One such emerging field is the use of lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS). Although a few LAMS have been developed, the most commonly reviewed and the only Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved LAMS is the Axios stent by Boston Scientific. In 2013, LAMS were initially approved by the FDA for the management of pancreatic fluid collection drainage in the presence walled-off necrosis. Pancreatic fluid collections are traditionally drained with either a plastic stent or a covered biliary self-expanding metal stent. Plastic stents have a double pigtail feature which prevents stent migration. However, their narrow lumen poses limitations as it can lead to early stent occlusion. Fully covered metal stents have larger diameters, allowing improved drainage and decreased stent occlusion but their tubular shape is prone to migration. Consequently, this results in leakage, and frequent retrievals. Over the years, due to their versatility, LAMS now have many off label uses. This includes management of gastric outlet obstruction, superior mesenteric artery syndrome, strictures, gallbladder drainage, and postsurgical collection drainage. In this review, we will be discussing the FDA approved and the nonapproved uses of LAMS.