Endoscopic gallbladder drainage for acute cholecystitis with high-risk surgical patients between transduodenal and transpapillary stenting

American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on the role of therapeutic EUS in the management of biliary tract disorders: summary and recommendations

This clinical practice guideline from the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy provides an evidence-based approach for the role of therapeutic EUS in the management of biliary tract disorders. This guideline was developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework and addresses the following: 1: The role of EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) versus percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) in resolving biliary obstruction in patients after failed ERCP. 2: The role of EUS-guided hepaticogastrostomy versus EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy in resolving distal malignant biliary obstruction after failed ERCP. 3: The role of EUS-directed transgastric ERCP (EDGE) versus laparoscopic-assisted ERCP and enteroscopy-assisted ERCP (E-ERCP) in resolving biliary obstruction in patients with Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB) anatomy. 4: The role of EUS-BD versus E-ERCP and PTBD in resolving biliary obstruction in patients with surgically altered anatomy other than RYGB. 5: The role of EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) versus percutaneous gallbladder drainage and endoscopic transpapillary transcystic gallbladder drainage in resolving acute cholecystitis in patients who are not candidates for cholecystectomy.

Acute cholecystitis management in high-risk, critically ill, and unfit-for-surgery patients: the Italian Society of Emergency Surgery and Trauma (SICUT) guidelines

Dealing with acute cholecystitis in high-risk, critically ill, and unfit-for-surgery patients is frequent during daily practice and requires complex management. Several procedures exist to postpone and/or prevent surgical intervention in those patients who temporarily or definitively cannot undergo surgery. After a systematic review of the literature, an expert panel from the Italian Society of Emergency Surgery and Trauma (SICUT) discussed the different issues and statements in subsequent rounds. The final version of the statements was discussed during the annual meeting in Rome (September 2022). The present paper presents the definitive conclusions of the discussion. Fifteen statements based on the literature evidence were provided. The statements gave precise indications regarding the decisional process and the management of patients who cannot temporarily or definitively undergo cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis. Acute cholecystitis management in high-risk, critically ill, and unfit-for-surgery patients should be multidisciplinary. The different gallbladder drainage methods must be tailored according to each patient and based on the expertise of the hospital. Percutaneous gallbladder drainage is recommended as the first choice as a bridge to surgery or in severely physiologically deranged patients. Endoscopic gallbladder drainage (cholecystoduodenostomy and cholecystogastrostomy) is suggested as a second-line alternative especially as a definitive procedure for those patients not amenable to surgical management. Trans-papillary gallbladder drainage is the last option to be reserved only to those unfit for other techniques. Delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy in patients with percutaneous gallbladder drainage is suggested in all those patients recovering from the conditions that previously discouraged surgical intervention after at least 6 weeks from the gallbladder drainage.

Single-pigtail plastic stent made from endoscopic nasobiliary drainage tubes in endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage: a retrospective case series

Technical failure of endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) is often attributed to device failure. To rectify this problem, we developed a single-pigtail plastic stent (SPPS) for EUS-GBD. We retrospectively reviewed the cases of four patients who underwent EUS-GBD for acute cholecystitis. To prepare the SPPS, a 7.5-Fr endoscopic nasobiliary drainage tube was cut to an appropriate length. The use of SPPS during EUS-GBD was successful from both technical and clinical standpoints. The SPPS spontaneously detached 57 days after the procedure in patient 4 and 412 days after the procedure in patient 1. Patient 1 developed cholecystitis after 426 days and was managed with antibiotics. The other three patients did not develop any complications after surgery. In conclusion, we designed a new SPPS dedicated to EUS-GBD and established its technical feasibility and clinical effectiveness.

Clinical application and follow-up of electrocautery-enhanced lumen-apposing metal stents for endoscopic ultrasonography-guided interventions

Aim: The lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS) is a new device that expands the scope of gastrointestinal intervention under endoscopy. LAMS was initially used for the treatment of pancreatic fluid collections (PFCs), but is increasingly being used off-label. The electrocautery system simplifies the deployment of LAMS, making it more suitable for off-label situations. The short-term results of electrocautery-enhanced lumen-apposing metal stents (ECE-LAMS) are satisfactory; however, the long-term follow-up results must be evaluated. The aim of this article is to review the expanded clinical application of ECE-LAMS, the clinical value of on-label and off-label use, and follow-up results.Methods: After searching in PubMed and Web of Science databases using 'electrocautery-enhanced lumen-apposing metal stents' and 'endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) -guided interventions' as keywords, studies related were compiled and examined.Results: ECE-LAMS are widely used for on-label and off-label situations. The short-term and long-term results of ECE-LAMS are satisfactory, but there are still some studies that do not agree with this viewpoint.Conclusion: The clinical application of ECE-LAMS is relatively safe and reliable but more well-designed randomized trials and prospective studies are needed to evaluate the impact of this technology on therapeutic EUS, to improve the safety and success rate of EUS-guided LAMS implantation, and to expand its application in other indications.

Strategy Comparison of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Gallbladder Drainage to Percutaneous Transhepatic Gallbladder Drainage, Following Failed Emergent Endoscopic Transpapillary Gallbladder Drainage

Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETGBD) is recommended for patients with acute cholecystitis at high risk for surgery/percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PTGBD). Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) has higher success and mortality rates than ETGBD. Optimal endoscopic drainage remains controversial. Patients with moderate/severe acute cholecystitis and high risk for surgery/PTGBD who underwent ETGBD were enrolled. In the new-ETGBD (N-ETGBD)/traditional-ETGBD (T-ETGBD) strategy, patients in whom the initial ETGBD failed underwent rescue-EUS-GBD in the same endoscopic session/rescue-PTGBD, respectively. Therapeutic outcomes were compared. Patients who could not undergo rescue-EUS-GBD/PTGBD owing to poor general conditions received conservative treatment. Technical success was defined as successful ETGBD or successful rescue-EUS-GBD/PTGBD. Forty-one/forty patients were enrolled in the N-ETGBD/T-ETGBD groups, respectively. The N-ETGBD group had a higher, though non-significant, technical success rate compared to the T-ETGBD group (97.6 vs. 90.0%, p = 0.157). The endoscopic technical success rate was significantly higher in the N-ETGBD than in the T-ETGBD group (97.6 vs. 82.5%, p = 0.023). The clinical success/adverse event rates were similar between both groups. The hospitalization duration was significantly shorter in the N-ETGBD than in the T-ETGBD group (6.6 ± 3.9 vs. 10.1 ± 6.4 days, p < 0.001). ETGBD with EUS-GBD as a rescue backup may be an ideal hybrid drainage for emergency endoscopic gallbladder drainage in high-risk surgical patients.

Real-life Indications and Outcome of Electrocautery-enhanced Lumen-apposing Metal Stents in a Tertiary Center

PURPOSE

Electrocautery-enhanced lumen-apposing stents (EC-LAMS) were originally designed for the drainage of the gallbladder, bile duct, and pancreas pseudocysts. Throughout the years, several off-label indications were established. This study aims to evaluate the indication, safety, efficacy, and outcome of all LAMS implanted in a single tertiary referral center.

METHODS

From April 2016 to April 2022, all patients undergoing LAMS placement in a single tertiary center were included. We present a detailed analysis of indications, success rates, and complications based on a retrospective analysis of our prospectively maintained database.

RESULTS

A total of 86 stents were placed in 77 patients between April 2016 and April 2022. Indications were walled-off pancreatic necrosis (25.6%), bile duct obstructions (16.3%), acute cholecystitis (15.1%), pancreas pseudocysts (15.1%), postoperative collections (10.5%), postoperative pancreatic fistulas (9.3%), and gastro-gastrostomy/jejunostomy (8.1%) to enable to perform an endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography in patients with gastric bypass. Technical success was 97.7% (84 out of 86). A total of 10 (11.7%) adverse events were observed. In 3 patients (3.5%), severe complications occurred, which required acute surgery; one displacement was closed through clips. In 7 patients (8.2%), bleedings occurred during necrosectomy or from mucosal erosions at the stent side, respectively, that were treated with endoclips.

CONCLUSIONS

EC-LAMS are safe and show a high technical success rate in all indications. In everyday clinical practice, the main indications are hepato-pancreato-biliary, and therefore an hepato-pancreato-biliary-surgical department should have EC-LAMS in their armamentarium.

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.

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.

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.

Ex vivo comparison of electrocautery-enhanced delivery of lumen-apposing metal stents matching electrosurgical workstations during EUS-guided gallbladder drainage

Background and Objectives

EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) has become one of the recommended treatments for patients with high-risk acute cholecystitis. However, the gallbladder reportedly collapsed due to bile leakage, which was a disadvantage that affects the surgical success rate. Different electrocautery-enhanced delivery of the lumen-apposing metal stents (ECE-LAMSs) using suitable power levels in electrosurgical workstations can increase the surgical success rate and reduce trauma. Therefore, we proposed the use of the ECE-LAMSs and electrosurgical workstations for the first time through ex vivo experiments to adjust the different power levels and select the most suitable electrosurgical power for each ECE-LAMS type.

Methods

We compared three types of ECE-LAMS (9Fr, 10.5Fr, and 10.8Fr) with three types of electrosurgical workstations during EUS-GBD. GBD was simulated ex vivo under the guidance of an ultrasound endoscope. We performed various power tests to elucidate the ideal electric power for different ECE-LAMS combined with the different types of electrosurgical workstations.

Results

For the 10.8Fr ECE-LAMS matched with the Martin, Erbe, and Olympus electrosurgical workstations, the ideal power levels were 200 W, 200 W, and 250W. For the 10.5Fr and 9Fr ECE-LAMS matched with the Martin, Erbe, and Olympus electrosurgical workstations, the ideal power levels were 150 W, 200 W, and 200 W.

Conclusion

During the operations, due to low-power levels in the electrosurgical workstations increased the number of cuts, the EUS images were obviously unclear, which affected the success rates of the operations. We suggested different power levels for the different types of LAMS and their matching electrosurgical workstations, which can increase the surgical success rates and reduce surgical injuries.

Feasibility of a Single Pigtail Stent Made by Cutting a Nasobiliary Drainage Tube in Endoscopic Transpapillary Gallbladder Stenting for Acute Cholecystitis

Background and objective

In this study, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a single pigtail stent made by cutting a nasobiliary drainage tube (NBD stent) by comparing the clinical outcomes of using an NBD stent and those of using a ready-made double pigtail stent (RDP stent) in endoscopic gallbladder stenting (EGBS) for acute cholecystitis.

Materials and methods

This was a single-center retrospective study involving 20 cases that had technical success with EGBS for acute cholecystitis; the patients were divided into two groups: those using NBD stent (NBD group) and those using RDP stent (RDP group). The baseline characteristics and clinical outcomes were compared between the two groups.

Results

There were 13 patients in the NBD group and seven in the RDP group. The rates of clinical success (NBD group: 92% vs. RDP group: 100%, p=0.45) did not differ significantly between the groups. Regarding adverse events, gallbladder perforation occurred in one case in the NBD group; however, no other adverse events occurred in either group (NBD group: 7.7% vs. RDP group: 0%, p=0.45). The stent patency periods did not differ significantly between the groups [NBD group: 43 (12-64) days vs. RDP group: 97 (58-215) days, p=0.17]. The stent patency period in cases of long-term stent placement after EGBS was 1,381 days and 1,579 days in the NBD group and 305 days in the RDP group, respectively.

Conclusion

NBD stents are considered as effective as RDP stents in EGBS for acute cholecystitis. They are highly versatile and can be used for both bridging to surgery and long-term stent placement.