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

Safety and effectiveness of endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage in patients with cirrhosis: an international multicenter experience

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) for symptomatic gallbladder disease has been shown to be safe and effective in patients with high surgical risk, but data are lacking for patients with cirrhosis. We investigated the safety and effectiveness of EUS-GBD in patients with and without cirrhosis.This retrospective review included patients who underwent EUS-GBD at four (three US and one Spanish) international tertiary care centers. Outcomes, including technical success, clinical success, and procedure-related adverse events, were compared between patients with and without cirrhosis.170 patients (47 with cirrhosis, 123 without cirrhosis) were included. There was no difference in age, sex, race, comorbidities, antiplatelet use, hemoglobin, or international normalized ratio between the two groups (P > 0.05 for all). The most common etiology of cirrhosis was alcohol (42.6%) with mean Model of End-stage Liver Disease-Sodium (MELD-Na) score of 16.2 (SD 8.8). Acute cholecystitis was more common in patients with cirrhosis (74.5% vs. 56.9%; P = 0.02). Technical (cirrhosis 97.9% vs. no cirrhosis 95.1%; P = 0.67) and clinical (93.6% vs. 94.9%; P = 0.71) success rates were similar in the two groups. Adverse events were infrequent and similar between groups, the most common being stent maldeployment (cirrhosis 4.3% vs. no cirrhosis 5.7%; P = 0.99). Survival rates were similar at the end of follow-up.EUS-GBD was safe and effective in patients with cirrhosis, with outcomes similar to patients without cirrhosis when performed by experienced echoendoscopists. Patients with cirrhosis and symptomatic gallbladder disease can be considered for EUS-GBD.

Feasibility of endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage for acute gangrenous cholecystitis in poor surgical candidates

OBJECTIVES

Surgery is generally the first choice of treatment for gangrenous cholecystitis (GC). However, some patients are not fit for surgery because of their comorbidities. We evaluated the feasibility of endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETGBD) for GC in poor surgical candidates.

METHODS

This retrospective study compared the outcomes of ETGBD for acute cholecystitis (AC) with and without complicated GC. Of the 136 patients who underwent ETGBD for AC at a single tertiary referral center between January 2019 and July 2023, 91 who underwent contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) before ETGBD were included in the analysis.

RESULTS

Patients were assigned to the GC (n = 29) and non-GC (n = 62) groups based on CT findings. The technical success rate of ETGBD, clinical success rate for AC, and rate of early adverse events (AEs) in the GC and non-GC groups were 86.2% vs. 91.9% (P = 0.63), 79.3% vs. 91.9% (P = 0.17), and 27.6% vs. 16.1% (P = 0.32), respectively. The technical and clinical success rates were slightly lower, while the early AE rate was higher in the GC group. However, the differences were not significant. The incidence of late AEs was 15.8% in the GC group and 17.9% in the non-GC group, with no significant difference (P = 0.87). Elective cholecystectomy was significantly less frequent in the GC group (P = 0.023).

CONCLUSION

ETGBD is a feasible treatment option for GC in patients contraindicated for surgery.

Interventional Endoscopic Ultrasonography: Advances in Application

Technological advances have greatly expanded the diagnostic and therapeutic capabilities of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS). The integration of cutting-edge imaging techniques, including tissue harmonic echo, contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS, elastography, and needle-based confocal laser endomicroscopy, have significantly enhanced lesion characterization and diagnostic accuracy. Additionally, developments in stent design and the introduction of new accessories have broadened the therapeutic applications of EUS. Ongoing innovations in clinical practice have transformed procedures such as drainage, tumor ablation, EUS-directed transgastric endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), the placement of fiducial markers, advancements in endohepatology, lesion characterization, and treatment. These developments continue to expand the role of EUS in delivering precise and effective therapeutic interventions.

A retrospective comparative study of percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage versus endoscopic gallbladder stenting on the clinical course of acute cholecystitis: A propensity score matching analysis using a nationwide inpatient database in Japan

BACKGROUND

We performed a retrospective comparative study to clarify the optimal gallbladder drainage method prior to elective cholecystectomy.

METHODS

We collected data from the Diagnosis Procedure Combination database about cholecystitis patients who underwent gallbladder drainage prior to cholecystectomy in a subsequent hospitalization between April 2014 and March 2020. We divided the study population into two groups: an endoscopic gallbladder stenting (EGBS) group and a percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PTGBD) group. We performed propensity score matching and compared surgical outcomes related to cholecystectomy.

RESULTS

We collected 6306 cases (PTGBD: 6112 cases; EGBS: 194 cases). In propensity score matching, we obtained 193 matched pairs from the study population. Long-term postoperative antibiotics therapy (2 vs. 9; risk ratio 4.7 [95% CI: 1.1-30.9]) was more frequent in the EGBS group than the PTGBD group. There were no significant differences between the two groups for laparotomic cholecystectomy and postoperative bile duct drainage. For reoperation, postoperative abdominal drainage and postoperative blood transfusion, there were few outcome occurrences and effect measures were not obtained.

CONCLUSION

Gallbladder drainage by EGBS may have more risk of surgical complications related to elective cholecystectomy than PTGBD. There are a few reports on this topic, so further research should be conducted.

Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder stenting vs percutaneous cholecystostomy for managing acute cholecystitis: Nationwide propensity score study

Background and study aims

Cholecystectomy is the standard treatment for acute cholecystitis, but it may not be suitable for all patients. For those who cannot undergo surgery, a percutaneous cholecystostomy tube (PCT) and ERCP-guided transpapillary gallbladder drainage are viable options. We aimed to perform a nationwide study to assess 30-day readmission rates, adverse events (AEs), and mortality rates in these two cohorts.

Patients and methods

We conducted a nationwide cohort study using data from the Nationwide Readmissions Database (NRD) from 2016 to 2019. We identified patients with acute cholecystitis during the index admission who underwent either PCT or ERCP-guided gallbladder drainage. Propensity score matching along with multivariable regression was used to compare cohorts.

Results

During the study period, 3,592 patients (average age 63.0 years) underwent endoscopic drainage, whereas 80,372 patients (average 70.8 years) underwent Interventional Radiology drainage. Utilizing multivariate Cox regression analysis, compared with ERCP, PCT had a higher risk for 30-day readmission (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.47; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.27 to 1.71; P < 0.001). The PCT group had a significantly higher rate of readmission for acute cholecystitis compared with the ERCP group (2.72% vs 0.86%; P < 0.005). Cox proportional hazard ratio showed a 3.41-fold increased risk (95% CI 1.99 to 5.84) for readmission in the PCT group. ERCP was consistently associated with lower rates of post-procedural AEs compared with PCT including acute hypoxemic respiratory failure ( P < 0.001), acute renal failure ( P < 0.001), shock ( P < 0.001), and need for blood transfusions ( P < 0.001).

Conclusions

Our nationwide analysis revealed that ERCP-guided gallbladder drainage should be the preferred approach for managing acute cholecystitis when unfit for surgery.

Feasibility of a novel 5F plastic stent in endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage for acute cholecystitis

Background and study aims

Many reports have demonstrated the efficacy of endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder stenting (EGBS) for acute cholecystitis (AC), most of which have traditionally used a 7F plastic stent. The study aim was to evaluate the efficacy of a novel 5F plastic stent in EGBS for AC.

Patients and methods

We designed a retrospective study that compared the outcomes between 7F and 5F stents in patients undergoing EGBS. Among 147 patients who underwent endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage for AC between January 2019 and July 2023, 104 who underwent EGBS using a 7F (n = 53) or 5F (n = 51) plastic stent were included in the analysis.

Results

The technical success rate for EGBS, clinical success rate for AC, and early adverse events (AEs) rate in the 7F and 5F groups were 92.5% vs 100%, 100% vs 98.0%, and 5.7% vs 3.9%, respectively, with no significant differences. However, only in the 7F group, four patients failed stent insertion and three patients developed postprocedure pancreatitis. Furthermore, incidence of hyperamylasemia was lower in the 5F group (24.5% vs 9.8%, P = 0.047). The late AE rate did not differ significantly between the 7F and 5F groups (14.3% vs 10.0%). The median time to late AE was 238 days for the 7F group and 187 days for the 5F group, with no significant difference.

Conclusions

A 5F stent can provide outcomes comparable to those of a 7F stent and help prevent hyperamylasemia.

Innovative use of a 3-Fr microcatheter for precision guidewire placement with digital single-operator cholangioscopy for pancreaticobiliary drainage (with video)

Biliary and pancreatic tract stenosis are hallmark symptoms in pancreaticobiliary diseases, transcending malignancy. Endoscopic techniques are pivotal for biliary/pancreatic drainage; however, challenging scenarios arise when attempting to pass a guidewire (GW) through obstruction. Cholangioscopy-assisted GW placement has proven valuable, but challenges persist in its execution, particularly in maneuvering the GW through cholangioscopy. Therefore, we explored the integration of a 3-Fr microcatheter into cholangioscopy with the aim of enhancing direct visualization and offering a super-selective approach. When GW manipulation under a digital single-operator cholangioscope (D-SOC) guidance was still unsuccessful in a resistant obstruction, the 3-Fr microcatheter was introduced. This technique was performed in 42 individuals for 37 biliary and 5 pancreatic duct drainages, among which there were 19 malignant, 18 benign, and 4 anastomotic obstructions. In all patients, contrast-filled cholangiography in the target area couldn't be achieved at the pre-microcatheter insertion stage due to obstruction. The technical success rate was 85.7% overall, 89.5% in malignant strictures, 84.2% in benign strictures, and 75.0% in anastomotic obstructions, resulting in a clinical success rate of 78.6%. The use of a 3-Fr microcatheter appears effective for endoscopic drainage performed for obstruction. This technique could pave the way for improved outcomes in patients with pancreaticobiliary diseases.

Surgical outcomes of patients with acute cholecystitis treated with gallbladder drainage followed by early cholecystectomy

AIM

This study aimed to investigate the impact of preoperative gallbladder drainage and the specific drainage method used on surgical outcomes in patients undergoing surgery for acute cholecystitis.

METHODS

This single-center retrospective cohort study included 221 patients who underwent early cholecystectomy between January 2016 and December 2020. Clinical data and outcomes of 140 patients who did not undergo drainage, 22 patients who underwent preoperative percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PTGBD), and 59 patients who underwent preoperative endoscopic naso-gallbladder drainage (ENGBD) were compared.

RESULTS

There was no difference in the operation time, blood loss, postoperative complications, or length of postoperative hospital stay between patients who did and did not undergo drainage. Among patients who underwent drainage, there was no difference between the ENGBD and PTGBD groups in operation time, blood loss, or postoperative complications; however, more patients in the PTGBD group underwent laparotomy and had a significantly longer postoperative hospital stay. The presence and type of drainage were not risk factors for postoperative complications.

CONCLUSION

The presence or absence of preoperative gallbladder drainage for acute cholecystitis and the type of drainage may not significantly affect surgical outcomes.

Prophylactic endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder stenting to prevent acute cholecystitis induced after metallic stent placement for malignant biliary strictures: a retrospective study in Japan

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Endoscopic biliary drainage using self-expandable metallic stents (SEMSs) for malignant biliary strictures occasionally induces acute cholecystitis (AC). This study evaluated the efficacy of prophylactic gallbladder stents (GBS) during SEMS placement.

METHODS

Among 158 patients who underwent SEMS placement for malignant biliary strictures between January 2018 and March 2023, 30 patients who attempted to undergo prophylactic GBS placement before SEMS placement were included.

RESULTS

Technical success was achieved in 21 cases (70.0%). The mean diameter of the cystic duct was more significant in the successful cases (6.5 mm vs. 3.7 mm, p<0.05). Adverse events occurred for 7 patients (23.3%: acute pancreatitis in 7; non-obstructive cholangitis in 1; perforation of the cystic duct in 1 with an overlap), all of which improved with conservative treatment. No patients developed AC when the GBS placement was successful, whereas 25 of the 128 patients (19.5%) without a prophylactic GBS developed AC during the median follow-up period of 357 days (p=0.043). In the multivariable analysis, GBS placement was a significant factor in preventing AC (hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% confidence interval, 0.37-0.99; p=0.045).

CONCLUSIONS

GBS may contribute to the prevention of AC after SEMS placement for malignant biliary strictures.

The Success Rate Is Lower but Completion Rate of Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Is higher in Endoscopic Transpapillary Gallbladder Drainage than Percutaneous Gallbladder Drainage for Acute Cholecystitis

BACKGROUND

We investigated the success and complication rates of endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETGBD) and percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PTGBD) and the outcomes of subsequent cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis.

METHODS

Patients (N=178) who underwent cholecystectomy after ETGBD or PTGBD were retrospectively assessed.

RESULTS

ETGBD was successful in 47 (85.5%) of 55 procedures, whereas PTGBD was successful in 123 (100%) of 123 sessions ( P <0.001). Complications related to ETGBD and PTGBD occurred in 6 (12.8%) of 47 and 16 (13.0%) of 123 patients, respectively ( P =0.97). After propensity matching, 43 patients from each group were selected. Median time from drainage to cholecystectomy was 48 (14 to 560) days with ETGBD and 35 (1 to 90) days with PTGBD ( P =0.004). Laparoscopy was selected more often in the ETGBD group (97.7%) than in the PTGBD group (79.1%) ( P =0.007), and conversion from laparoscopy to open cholecystectomy was more common with PTGBD (41.2%) than with ETGBD (7.1%) ( P <0.001). Mean operation time was significantly shorter with ETGBD (135.8±66.7 min) than with PTGBD (195.8±62.2 min) ( P <0.001). The incidence of Clavien-Dindo grade ≥III postoperative complications was 9.3% with ETGBD and 11.6% with PTGBD ( P =0.99).

CONCLUSIONS

The success rate is lower but completion of laparoscopic cholecystectomy is more in endoscopic gallbladder drainage than percutaneous gallbladder drainage for acute cholecystitis.

Risk factors and treatment strategies for cholecystitis after metallic stent placement for malignant biliary obstruction: a multicenter retrospective study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Cholecystitis can occur after self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) placement for malignant biliary obstruction (MBO), but the best treatment option for cholecystitis has not been determined. Here, we aimed to identify the risk factors of cholecystitis after SEMS placement and determine the best treatment option.

METHODS

Incidence, treatments, and predictive factors of cholecystitis were retrospectively evaluated in 1084 patients with distal MBO (DMBO) and 353 patients with hilar MBO (HMBO) who underwent SEMS placement at 12 institutions from January 2012 to March 2021.

RESULTS

Cholecystitis occurred in 7.5% of patients with DMBO and 5.9% of patients with HMBO. The recurrence rate was significantly lower (P = .043) and the recurrence-free period significantly longer (P = .039) in endoscopic procedures than in percutaneous procedures for cholecystitis treatment. EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) was better in terms of technical success, procedure time, and recurrence-free period than endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage. Obstruction across the cystic duct orifice by tumor (P = .015) and by stent (P = .037) were independent risk factors for cholecystitis in DMBO. Cases with multiple SEMS placements (odds ratio [OR], 11; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.68-190; P = .091) and with gallbladder stones (OR, 2.3; 95% CI ,0.92-5.6; P = .075) had a higher risk for cholecystitis in HMBO.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidences of cholecystitis after SEMS placement for DMBO and HMBO were similar. EUS-GBD is the optimal treatment option for patients with cholecystitis after SEMS placement for MBO.

Endoscopic Ultrasonography-Guided Gallbladder Drainage

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) has emerged as a popular alternative to percutaneous cholecystostomy and endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage for patients suffering from acute calculous cholecystitis who are at high risk for surgery. Multiple cohorts, meta-analyses, and a randomized controlled trial have shown that EUS-GBD has lower rates of recurrent cholecystitis and unplanned reinterventions, while achieving similar technical and clinical success rates than transpapillary cystic duct stenting. The essential steps, precautions in performing EUS-GBD and long-term management will be discussed in this article.

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.

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.

Percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage versus endoscopic gallbladder stenting for managing acute cholecystitis until laparoscopic cholecystectomy

INTRODUCTION

Gallbladder drainage by methods such as percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PTGBD) or endoscopic gallbladder stenting (EGBS) is important in the early management of moderate to severe acute cholecystitis.

METHODS

In patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) for acute cholecystitis after a month or more of gallbladder drainage, the clinical course was compared between patients initially treated with PTGBD or EGBS.

RESULTS

Among 331 patients undergoing LC for cholecystitis between 2018 and 2022, 43 first underwent 1 or more months of gallbladder drainage. The median interval between drainage initiation and LC was 89 days (range, 28-261) among 34 patients with PTGBD and 70 days (range, 62-188) among nine with EGBS (p = 0.644). During this waiting period, PTGBD was clamped in six patients and removed in five. Cholecystitis relapsed in three PTGBD patients (9%) and four EGBS patients (44%; p = 0.026). Relapses were managed with medications. Cholecystectomy duration (p = 0.022), intraoperative blood loss (p = 0.026), frequency of abdominal drain insertion (p = 0.023), and resort to bailout surgery such as fundus-first approaches (p = 0.030) were significantly greater in patients with EGBS. Postoperative complications were somewhat likelier (p = 0.095) and postoperative hospital stays were longer (p = 0.007) in the EGBS group.

CONCLUSION

Among patients whose LC was performed 1 or more months after initiation of drainage, daily living during the waiting period associated with drainage was well supported by EGBS, but LC and the postoperative course were more complicated than in PTGBD patients.

Deep learning nomogram for preoperative distinction between Xanthogranulomatous cholecystitis and gallbladder carcinoma: A novel approach for surgical decision

The distinction between Xanthogranulomatous Cholecystitis (XGC) and Gallbladder Carcinoma (GBC) is challenging due to their similar imaging features. This study aimed to differentiate between XGC and GBC using a deep learning nomogram model built from contrast enhanced computed tomography (CT) scans. 297 patients were included with confirmed XGC (94) and GBC (203) as the training and internal validation cohort from 2017 to 2021. The deep learning model Resnet-18 with Fourier transformation named FCovResnet18, shows most impressive potential in distinguishing XGC from GBC using 3-phase merged images. The accuracy, precision and area under the curve (AUC) of the model were then calculated. An additional cohort of 74 patients consisting of 22 XGC and 52 GBC patients was enrolled from two subsidiary hospitals as the external validation cohort. The accuracy, precision and AUC achieve 0.98, 0.99, 1.00 in the internal validation cohort and 0.89, 0.92, 0.92 in external validation cohort. A nomogram model combining clinical characteristics and deep learning prediction score showed improved predicting value. Altogether, FCovResnet18 nomogram has demonstrated its ability to effectively differentiate XGC from GBC preoperatively, which significantly aid surgeons in making informed and accurate surgical decisions for XGC and GBC patients.

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.

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.

Acute cholecystitis: Which flow-chart for the most appropriate management?

Acute cholecystitis (AC) is a very common disease in clinical practice. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy remains the gold standard treatment for AC, however due to aging population, the increased prevalence of multiple comorbidities and the extensive use of anticoagulants, surgical procedures may be too risky when dealing with patients in emergency settings. In these subsets of patients, a mini-invasive management may be an effective option, both as a definitive treatment or as bridge-to-surgery. In this paper, several non-operative treatments are described and their benefits and drawbacks are highlighted. Percutaneous gallbladder drainage (PT-GBD) is one of the most common and widespread techniques. It is easy to perform and has a good cost/benefit ratio. Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETGBD) is a challenging procedure that is usually performed in high volume centers by expert endoscopists, and it has a specific indication for selected cases. EUS-guided drainage (EUS-GBD) is still not widely available, but it is an effective procedure that could have several advantages, especially in rate of reinterventions. All these treatment options should be considered together in a stepwise approach and addressed to patients after an accurate case-by-case evaluation in a multidisciplinary discussion. In this review, we provide a possible flowchart in order to optimize treatments, resource and provide to patients a tailored approach.

Prophylactic endoscopic gallbladder stent placement for cholecystitis after covered metal stent placement for distal biliary obstruction (with video)

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Acute cholecystitis is occasionally observed after biliary drainage using a covered self-expandable metal stent (CSEMS) for distal biliary obstruction (DBO). Gallbladder drainage before CSEMS placement may reduce cholecystitis. This study aimed to examine the preventive effect of endoscopic gallbladder stent placement (EGBS) on cholecystitis with CSEMSs.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed patients with DBO who underwent CSEMS placement across the orifice of the cystic duct between November 2014 and October 2021 and were negative for cholecystitis on biliary drainage. Prophylactic EGBS was attempted before CSEMS placement. The incidence of cholecystitis was compared between patients with and without EGBS.

RESULTS

In total, 286 patients (128 men; median age, 75 years) were included in this study. EGBS was attempted in 32 patients before CSEMS placement, and technical success was achieved in 24 patients (75%). Adverse events were noted in 3 patients (9.4%; penetration of cystic duct in 1 and acute pancreatitis in 2). The cumulative incidence of cholecystitis was significantly lower in patients with EGBS than in those without EGBS (1 [4.2%] vs 56 [21.4%], P = .045). In multivariable analysis, EGBS was a significant protective factor against cholecystitis (hazard ratio, .11; 95% confidence interval, .01-.79; P = .028).

CONCLUSIONS

Although the transpapillary approach to the gallbladder is not easy for patients with DBO, EGBS is effective in preventing cholecystitis associated with CSEMS placement.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Gallbladder Drainage for Malignant Biliary Obstruction: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) is a rescue technique for patients with malignant biliary obstruction who fail conventional treatment with ERCP or EUS-guided biliary drainage. The technique has been successfully employed in the management of acute cholecystitis in patients not fit for surgery. However, the evidence for its use in malignant obstruction is less robust. This review article aims to evaluate the data available at present to better understand the safety and efficacy of EUS-guided gallbladder drainage.

METHODS

A detailed literature review was conducted and several databases were searched for any studies relating to EUS-GBD in malignant biliary obstruction. Pooled rates with 95% confidence intervals were calculated for clinical success and adverse events.

RESULTS

Our search identified 298 studies related to EUS-GBD. The final analysis included 7 studies with 136 patients. The pooled rate of clinical success (95% CI) was 85% (78-90%, I2: 0%). The pooled rate of adverse events (95% CI) was 13% (7-19%, I2: 0%). Adverse events included: peritonitis, bleeding, bile leakage, stent migration, and stent occlusion. No deaths directly related to the procedure were reported; however, in some of the studies, deaths occurred due to disease progression.

CONCLUSION

This review supports the use of EUS-guided gallbladder drainage as a rescue option for patients who have failed conventional measures.

Theoretical step approach with 'Three-pillar' device assistance for successful endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETGBD) has been reported as an alternative procedure for acute cholecystitis but remains a challenging procedure.

AIMS

To elucidate the efficacy of a strategic approach for ETGBD that utilizes a four-step classification system and the optional use of 'Three-pillar' assistance with the following devices: cholangioscopy (SpyGlass DS, SG), a flex-type guidewire (Flex-GW), and a 3-Fr microcatheter (3-Fr Micro).

METHODS

A total of 115 patients undergoing ETGBD were studied retrospectively. Characteristics and technical outcomes were compared between conventional ETGBD technique (Classical ETGBD, N = 50) and strategic ETGBD with optional Three-pillar assistance (Strategic ETGBD, N = 65).

RESULTS

SG-assistance (15/65, 23.1%) was as an excellent troubleshooter in Category 1 (failure to identify the cystic duct [CD] orifice) and Category 2 (failure to advance the GW across the CD takeoff due to unfavorable angle). Flex-GW (19/65, 29.2%) worked for Category 3b (failure of GW access to the GB due to multiple tortuosities). 3-Fr Micro (11/65, 16.9%) was effective for Category 3a (failure of GW access to the GB due to CD obstruction) and Category 4 (failure of drainage stent insertion to the GB). The overall technical success rate was significantly higher for Strategic ETGBD (63/65, 96.9%) compared with Classical ETGBD (36/50, 72.0%) (p = 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Strategic ETGBD, which includes the Three-pillar assistance options of SG in the initial steps, Flex-GW for tortuous CD, and 3-Fr Micro for stenotic CD, achieved a significantly higher success rate than for Classical ETGBD.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Gallbladder Drainage versus Percutaneous Gallbladder Drainage for Acute Cholecystitis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PT-GBD) has been the treatment of choice for acute cholecystitis patients who are not suitable for surgery. The effectiveness of endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) as an alternative to PT-GBD is not clear. In this meta-analysis, we have compared their efficacy and adverse events. Methods: We adhered to the PRISMA statement to conduct this meta-analysis. Online databases were searched for studies that compared EUS-GBD and PT-GBD for acute cholecystitis. The primary outcomes of interest were technical success, clinical success, and adverse events. The pooled odds ratio (OR) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) was calculated using the random-effects model. Results: A total of 396 articles were screened, and 11 eligible studies were identified. There were 1136 patients, of which 57.5% were male, 477 (mean age 73.33 ± 11.28 years) underwent EUS-GBD, and 698 (mean age 73.77 ± 8.7 years) underwent PT-GBD. EUS-GBD had significantly better technical success (OR 0.40; 95% CI 0.17-0.94; p = 0.04), fewer adverse events (OR 0.35; 95% CI 0.21-0.61; p = 0.00), and lower reintervention rates (OR 0.18; 95% CI 0.05-0.57; p = 0.00) than PT-GBD. No difference in clinical success (OR 1.34; 95% CI 0.65-2.79; p = 0.42), readmission rate (OR 0.34; 95% CI 0.08-1.54; p = 0.16), or mortality rate (OR 0.73; 95% CI 0.30-1.80; p = 0.50) was noted. There was low heterogeneity (I2 = 0) among the studies. Egger's test showed no significant publication bias (p = 0.595). Conclusion: EUS-GBD can be a safe and effective alternative to PT-GBD for treating acute cholecystitis in non-surgical patients and has fewer adverse events and a lower reintervention rate than PT-GBD.

Endoscopic Treatment of Acute Cholelithiasis Using AXIOS Stenting and Lithotripsy: A Case Series

The management of gallbladder diseases, including acute cholecystitis and choledocholithiasis, puts a significant strain on healthcare. The first-line treatment for acute cholecystitis is cholecystectomy. Patients who have concomitant choledocholithiasis, large stones, and/or gallstone pancreatitis may also benefit from endoscopic interventions. Endoscopic treatments may also be utilized in patients who are not surgical candidates due to underlying comorbidities. Studies examining the role of endoscopic lithotripsy in concomitant cholecystitis are limited. Herein we present a case series in which an AXIOS stent (Boston Scientific, Marlborough, Massachusetts) was placed into the gallbladder for decompression and utilized to access the gallbladder lumen to perform electrohydraulic lithotripsy in two patients.

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.

Efficacy of endoscopic gallbladder drainage in patients with acute cholecystitis

Background

Early cholecystectomy is recommended for patients with acute cholecystitis. However, emergency surgery may not be indicated due to complications and disease severity. Patients requiring drainage are usually treated with percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PTGBD), whereas patients with biliary duct stones undergo endoscopic stones removal followed by endoscopic gallbladder drainage (EGBD). Herein, we investigated the efficacy of EGBD in patients with acute cholecystitis.

Methods

Overall, 101 patients receiving laparoscopic cholecystectomy between September 2019 and September 2020 in our department were retrospectively analyzed.

Results

The patients (n = 101) were divided into three groups: control group that did not undergo drainage (n = 68), a group that underwent EGBD (n = 7), and a group that underwent PTGBD (n = 26). Median surgery time was 107, 166, and 143 min, respectively. Control group had a significantly shorter surgery time, whereas it did not significantly differ between EGBD and PTGBD groups. The median amount of bleeding was 5 g, 7 g, and 7.5 g, respectively, and control group had significantly less bleeding than the drainage group. We further divided patients into the following subgroups: patients requiring a 5 mm clip to ligate the cystic duct, patients requiring a 10 mm clip due to the thickness of the cystic duct, patients requiring an automatic suturing device, and patients undergoing subtotal cholecystectomy due to impossible cystic duct ligation. There was no significant difference between EGBD and PTGBD regarding the clip used or the need for an automatic suturing device and subtotal cholecystectomy.

Conclusions

There was no significant difference between EGBD and PTGBD groups regarding surgery time or bleeding amount when surgery was performed after gallbladder drainage for acute cholecystitis. Therefore, EGBD was considered a useful preoperative drainage method requiring no drainage bag.

Soehendra stent retriever as a useful delivery device of drainage stent for passing an impacted cystic duct stone in a patient with acute cholecystitis

Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage is an alternative procedure for patients with acute cholecystitis. However, this procedure is technically challenging because the drainage stent is sometimes obstructed by an impacted cystic duct stone, even if the guidewire is advanced into the gallbladder. In this report, the front end of a standard endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography catheter was cut to an appropriate length as a drainage stent for transpapillary gallbladder drainage. However, this modified stent became stuck because of an impacted cystic duct stone. The Soehendra stent retriever was used as a stent delivery device in this setting. A Soehendra stent retriever with clockwise rotation was coupled with the drainage stent. Integrated devices provide a stent tip for pushability and torqueability. The stuck drainage stent at the impacted cystic duct stone resumed advancement into the gallbladder. After stent indwelling, decoupling was easy under counterclockwise rotation of the Soehendra stent retriever.

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.

Incidence and management of cystic duct perforation during endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage for acute cholecystitis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Evidence regarding the incidence and clinical outcome of cystic duct perforation (CDP) during endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETGBD) is inadequate. The present study aimed to evaluate the incidence and management of CDP during ETGBD.

METHODS

Between March 2011 and December 2019, 249 patients underwent initial ETGBD for acute cholecystitis. The incidence of CDP was retrospectively examined and the outcomes between the CDP and non-CDP groups were compared.

RESULTS

CDP during ETGBD occurred in 23 (9.2%) of 249 patients (caused by guidewire in 15 and cannula in 8). ETGBD was successful in 10 patients following CDP. In 13 patients who failed ETGBD, 11 underwent bile duct drainage during the same session; nine patients underwent gallbladder decompression by other methods, such as percutaneous drainage. Clinical resolution for acute cholecystitis was achieved in 20 patients, and no bile peritonitis was noted. ETGBD technical success rates (45.3% vs. 91.2%, p < 0.001), ETGBD procedure times (66.5 vs. 54.8 min, p = 0.041), and hospitalization periods (24.5 vs. 18.7 days, p = 0.028) were significantly inferior in the CDP group (n = 23) compared with the non-CDP group (n = 216). There were no differences in clinical success and adverse events other than CDP between both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Cystic duct perforation reduced the ETGBD technical success rate. However, even in patients with cystic duct perforation, an improvement of acute cholecystitis was achieved by subsequent successful ETGBD or additional procedures, such as percutaneous drainage.

Ultimate outcomes of three modalities for non-surgical gallbladder drainage in acute cholecystitis with or without concomitant common bile duct stones

Backgrounds/Aims

In moderate and high-surgical risk patients with acute cholecystitis, studies comparing percutaneous cholecystostomy (PC) vs. endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder stenting (ETGS) vs. endoscopic ultrasound-guided transmural gallbladder stenting (EUGS) are limited. Thus, the aim of this study was to compare efficacy and recurrence of cholecystitis after PC, ETGS, or EUGS during follow-up.

Methods

We reviewed 143 moderate and high-surgical risk patients with acute cholecystitis with or without concomitant common bile duct stones who underwent PC, ETGS, or EUGS at our hospital. Technical success rate (TSR), clinical success rate (CSR), and recurrence were compared.

Results

TSR in PC or EUGS group was higher than that in the ETGS group for those with concomitant common bile duct stones (100% vs. 100% vs. 73.2%; p = 0.07) and for those without concomitant common bile duct stones (100% vs. 100% vs. 77.3%; p < 0.001). CSR in ETGS or EUGS group was higher than that in the PC group for those with concomitant common bile duct stones (96.2% vs. 100% vs. 87.5%; p = 0.41) and for those without concomitant common bile duct stones (94.1% vs. 100% vs. 63.0%; p = 0.006). Using Kaplan–Meier analysis, the overall recurrent risk was the highest in the PC group (p = 0.004).

Conclusions

In moderate and high-surgical risk patients with acute cholecystitis, EUGS provides significantly higher CSR with comparable TSR to PC. Thus, ETGS should be the first choice in those with concomitant common bile duct stones. Among the three patient groups, those who received PC had the highest rate of recurrence.

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.

The new era of endoscopic ultrasound in biliary disorders

Biliary obstruction is one of challenging biliary disorders in gastroenterology field, where this long-standing condition can also lead to portal hypertension and multi-disciplinary teamwork is usually needed to manage this problem. Biliary drainage is the primary management to prevent prolonged cholestasis. Biliary system with its thin-walled and tubular structure sometimes makes the diagnosis and therapeutic not easy to approach. Over the past 3 decades, numerous new and modern diagnostic and therapeutic modalities have been developed to manage the complex biliary problems. It is well known that endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD), and surgical procedure are common procedures in managing biliary disorders. However, surgical therapy and ERCP are not always easy to perform due to several contraindications. Because of difficulty in performing these procedures or unavailability of these procedures in the facility, PTBD, as the primary non-surgical procedure of choice, has been popular due to its easy technique. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has evolved significantly not only as a diagnostic tool for identification and staging, but also for interventional approaches, especially in management of biliary malignancy. Recently, EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) and EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) are developed for managing biliary disorders. Whether EUS can be useful for managing biliary obstruction as a primary procedure is still controversial. Hence, a large number of further studies are required to validate.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Gallbladder Drainage

The mainstay of management of acute cholecystitis is surgical. Despite the advances in anesthesia and laparoscopic surgery, there is a significant pool of patients that are not candidates for surgery given their significant comorbidities and limited functional reserve. Historically percutaneous gallbladder drainage has been utilized to temporize these patients. Recently, endoscopic approaches are being explored with transpapillary and transmural drainage. In this article, we discuss the background, current status, technical challenges, adverse events, and outcomes of endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage for management of acute cholecystitis.

Therapeutic interventional endoscopic ultrasound in pancreato-biliary disorders: Does it really replace the surgical/percutaneous approach?

Pancreato-biliary disorders are still incredibly challenging in the field of gastroenterology, as they would sometimes require multi-approach interventional procedures. Recently, therapeutic interventional endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has emerged as a potential alternative to surgical or percutaneous approaches. Unfortunately, considering the high cost of EUS, lack of facility and expertise, most gastroenterologists still often refer cases to undergo surgical interventions without contemplating the possibility of utilizing EUS first. EUS-guided biliary drainage has become one of the best choices for establishing access to biliary system, given the clear visualization of pancreas, gallbladder, and common bile duct. Although there are still only a few studies which directly compare EUS-guided and surgical approaches for biliary drainage, current evidence demonstrated the superiority of EUS-guided approach in terms of adverse events and re-intervention rates, with similarly high technical and clinical success rates compared to percutaneous and surgical approaches, especially in patients with history of failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography attempt. Comparable success rates with shorter length of hospital stay between endoscopic and surgical approaches have also been exhibited for pancreatic pseudocysts and walled-off necrosis. Recent findings about the progress of EUS approach in gastroenterostomy/jejunostomy also indicated a promising potential of EUS, as a less invasive approach, for managing gastric outlet obstruction.

Image-guided percutaneous cholecystostomy: a comprehensive review

Acute cholecystitis (AC) is a common emergency condition with severity ranging from mild to severe. Gallstones and critical illnesses are the common predisposing factors. Mild AC is primarily managed with medical therapy and early cholecystectomy. Moderate and severe AC require individualized treatment with a preference for early cholecystectomy. However, cholecystectomy may not always be feasible due to co-morbidities. Hence, this group of patients needs minimally invasive methods to drain the gallbladder (GB). Percutaneous cholecystostomy (PC) is the image-guided drainage of GB in the setting of moderate to severe AC. There are different approaches to PC. The technical aspects, success, and complications of PC as well as management of cholecystostomy catheter after the patient recovers from the acute episode should be thoroughly understood by the interventional radiologist. We present an extensive up-to-date review of the essential aspects of PC including indications, contraindications, techniques, and outcomes, including complications and success rates.

The efficacy and safety of preoperative cholangiography via percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PTGBD) for difficult laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC)

BACKGROUND

Percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PTGBD) is an important procedure for initial treatment of severe acute cholecystitis (AC) that is contraindicated for early laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). We presented our primary experience on a new approach of cholangiography via PTGBD (PTGBD-C) for preoperative delineation of biliary anatomy.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted on 93 patients who received PTGBD followed by LC for AC, with allocation into 2 groups that were PTGBD with (PTGBD-C group, 32 patients) or without (PTGBD-N group, 61 patients) cholangiography. All the clinical data, including demographics, cholangiography findings, operations, and complications, were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

Cholangiography was attempted in 32 patients with a success of 31 cases, and the most common complication was transient fever in 3 patients. PTGBD-C group of patients showed significantly less operation time (83.2 ± 22.32 vs. 106.5 ± 40.25 min, P = 0.041) and conversion rate (0 vs. 2). There was no statistical difference in terms of postoperative hospitalization and complications.

CONCLUSIONS

PTGBD-C is a feasible and safe procedure for severe AC patients with delayed LC. It has advantages of direct cholangiography, being easy to perform and cost-effective, thus should be considered for clinical usage.

Four-Step Classification of Endoscopic Transpapillary Gallbladder Drainage and the Practical Efficacy of Cholangioscopic Assistance

Background/Aims

Although endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETGBD) has been reported as an alternative procedure for acute cholecystitis, it requires advanced endoscopic techniques. In terms of the certainty of achieving drainage, it remains a challenging procedure. The aim of the current study was to elucidate the practical efficacy of cholangioscopic assistance and to develop a new classification that could be used to evaluate the technical difficulty of ETGBD and provide a theoretical strategy to apply cholangioscopy appropriately for difficult ETGBD.

Methods

A total of 101 patients undergoing ETGBD were retrospectively studied. The characteristics and technical outcomes of ETGBD with conventional ETGBD (C-ETGBD) and SpyGlass DS-assisted ETGBD (SG-ETGBD) were evaluated. The characteristics and technique-dependent factors of unsuccessful C-ETGBD/SG-ETGBD were evaluated using the classification based on the steps of the procedure. The predictive factors of successful C-ETGBD/SG-ETGBD were examined.

Results

C-ETGBD was successful in 73 patients (72.3%). SG-ETGBD was successful in 11 of 13 patients (84.6%) who had C-ETGBD failure. Optional SG-ETGBD significantly increased the final success rate (94.1%) compared to C-ETGBD alone (p=0.003). ETGBD procedures could be classified into four steps. SG-assistance worked as an excellent troubleshooter in step 1 (failure to identify the cystic duct orifice) and step 2 (failure of guidewire advancement across the downturned angle of cystic duct takeoff). Magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography could provide predictive information based on the classification.

Conclusions

Optional SG-ETGBD achieved a significantly higher success rate than C-ETGBD alone. Step classification is helpful for determining the technical difficulty of ETGBD and developing a theoretical strategy to apply cholangioscopy in a coordinated manner.

Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Gallbladder Drainage Versus Percutaneous Transhepatic Gallbladder Drainage for Acute Cholecystitis with High Surgical Risk: An Up-to-Date Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

Background: To compare the safety and effectiveness of endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUSGBD) with percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PTGBD) for acute cholecystitis with high surgical risk. Methods: An electronic search was performed of the major databases, namely PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov until July 1, 2020. Studies comparing EUSGBD with PTGBD were included. Results: We identified 8 studies involving 801 patients, and patients were divided into two groups (EUSGBD group = 338 and PTGBD = 463). EUSGBD was associated with less reintervention (odds ratio [OR] = 0.15; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.07-0.32; P < .00001) and readmission (OR = 0.24; 95% CI: 0.08-0.67; P = 7). With lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS), EUSGBD was associated with fewer adverse events (OR = 0.35; 95% CI: 0.13-0.93; P = .03), recurrent cholecystitis (OR = 0.27; 95% CI: 0.10-0.71; P = .008) and readmission (OR = 0.10; 95% CI: 0.03-0.32; P = .0001). There were no significant differences between the groups regarding clinical success (OR = 1.47; 95% CI: 0.75-2.90; P = .26). Technical success with PTGBD was higher than that with EUSGBD (OR = 0.32; 95% CI: 0.13-0.83; P = .02). Conclusions: EUSGBD was comparable with PTGBD regarding clinical success, with less reintervention and readmission, for acute cholecystitis with high surgical risk. The cholecystitis recurrence rate was lower with EUSGBD with LAMS.

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).

Which Are the Most Suitable Stents for Interventional Endoscopic Ultrasound?

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided interventions provide easy access to structures adjacent to the gastrointestinal tract, effectively targeting them for therapeutic purposes. They play an important role in the management of pancreatic fluid collections (PFC) and bile duct (BD) and pancreatic duct (PD) drainage in cases of failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) or gallbladder (GB) drainage. Specially designed stents and delivery systems for EUS-guided transluminal interventions allow various new applications and improve the efficacy and safety of these procedures. In fact, EUS-guided drainage has emerged as the treatment of choice for the management of PFC, and recent innovations such as fully covered metal stents (including lumen-apposing metal stents) have improved outcomes in patients with walled-off necrosis. Similarly, EUS-guided BD and PD drainage with specially designed stents can be beneficial for patients with failed ERCP due to an inaccessible papilla, gastric outlet obstruction, or surgically altered anatomy. EUS-guided GB drainage is also performed using dedicated stents in patients with acute cholecystitis who are not fit for surgery. Although the field of dedicated stents for interventional EUS is rapidly advancing with increasing innovations, the debate on the most appropriate stent for EUS-guided drainage has resurfaced. Furthermore, some important questions remain unaddressed, such as which stent improves clinical outcomes and safety in EUS-guided drainage. Herein, the current status and problems of the available stents are reviewed, including the applicable indications, long-term clinical outcomes, comparison between each stent, and their future prospects.

2020 World Society of Emergency Surgery updated guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute calculus cholecystitis

BACKGROUND

Acute calculus cholecystitis (ACC) has a high incidence in the general population. The presence of several areas of uncertainty, along with the availability of new evidence, prompted the current update of the 2016 WSES (World Society of Emergency Surgery) Guidelines on ACC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The WSES president appointed four members as a scientific secretariat, four members as an organization committee and four members as a scientific committee, choosing them from the expert affiliates of WSES. Relevant key questions were constructed, and the task force produced drafts of each section based on the best scientific evidence from PubMed and EMBASE Library; recommendations were developed in order to answer these key questions. The quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were reviewed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria (see https://www.gradeworkinggroup.org/ ). All the statements were presented, discussed and voted upon during the Consensus Conference at the 6th World Congress of the World Society of Emergency Surgery held in Nijmegen (NL) in May 2019. A revised version of the statements was voted upon via an online questionnaire until consensus was reached.

RESULTS

The pivotal role of surgery is confirmed, including in high-risk patients. When compared with the WSES 2016 guidelines, the role of gallbladder drainage is reduced, despite the considerable technical improvements available. Early laparoscopic cholecystectomy (ELC) should be the standard of care whenever possible, even in subgroups of patients who are considered fragile, such as the elderly; those with cardiac disease, renal disease and cirrhosis; or those who are generally at high risk for surgery. Subtotal cholecystectomy is safe and represents a valuable option in cases of difficult gallbladder removal.

CONCLUSIONS, KNOWLEDGE GAPS AND RESEARCH RECOMMENDATIONS

ELC has a central role in the management of patients with ACC. The value of surgical treatment for high-risk patients should lead to a distinction between high-risk patients and patients who are not suitable for surgery. Further evidence on the role of clinical judgement and the use of clinical scores as adjunctive tools to guide treatment of high-risk patients and patients who are not suitable for surgery is required. The development of local policies for safe laparoscopic cholecystectomy is recommended.

Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage for acute cholecystitis is feasible for patients receiving antithrombotic therapy

OBJECTIVES

Patients with acute cholecystitis receiving antithrombotic therapy (ATT) have an increased risk of bleeding complications during surgery and percutaneous drainage. Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETGBD) is recommended for such cases; however, evidence is limited. To investigate this issue further, we performed a retrospective multicenter study.

METHODS

One hundred thirty patients with acute cholecystitis who underwent ETGBD were enrolled. They were divided into an ATT group (continuation of ATT on the day of the procedure and/or heparin substitution) and a Non-ATT group (discontinuation or no use of ATT). The primary outcome was bleeding complication rate, and the secondary outcomes were technical success rate, clinical success rate and total complication rate.

RESULTS

Eighty-three patients were enrolled in the ATT group, and 47 were enrolled in the Non-ATT group. In the ATT group, 42.2% continued multi-agent ATT. No bleeding complications occurred in either group. There were no significant differences between the ATT and Non-ATT groups in the technical success rate (84.3% vs 89.4%, P = 0.426 respectively) or the clinical success rate (97.1% vs 100%, P = 0.259, respectively). The overall early complication rate was 3.1% (4/130): mild pancreatitis (n = 3) and cholangitis (n = 1). Stent dysfunction was found in 10.9% of patients (at 196 days on average), and the 12-month stent patency rate was 69.0%.

CONCLUSIONS

No significant difference was found in the bleeding complication rate between ETGBD with and without ATT. ETGBD may be an ideal drainage method for patients with acute cholecystitis receiving ATT.

Practical Approaches for High-Risk Surgical Patients with Acute Cholecystitis: The Percutaneous Approach versus Endoscopic Alternatives

In high-risk surgical patients with acute cholecystitis who are not candidates for early laparoscopic cholecystectomy, gallbladder (GB) drainage is an alternative treatment option. Percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PTGBD) is a recommended first line intervention because of its high efficacy and feasibility in most centers. However, with the advent of endoscopic accessories and technology, endoscopic GB drainage has been chosen as a more favorable choice by endoscopists. Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETGBD) can be performed under either fluoroscopic or peroral cholangioscopic guidance via endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography by the transpapillary placement of a long double-pigtail stent. In a patient with common bile duct stones, this procedure is accompanied with stone removal. ETGBD is especially useful for acute cholecystitis patients who are contraindicated for PTGBD or those with severe coagulopathy, thrombocytopenia, and abnormal anatomy. Moreover, the advantage of ETGBD is its preservation of the external GB structure. Thereby it would not disturb the future cholecystectomy. Recently, endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) using plastic, fully covered metallic, or lumen-apposing metal stents transmurally has emerged as a modality for GB drainage with higher technical and clinical success rates. EUS-GBD can provide a more permanent GB drainage than PTGBD and ETGBD.

Lumen-apposing metal stents for approved and off-label indications: a single-centre experience

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS

Lumen-apposing stents (LAMS) are approved to treat peripancreatic collections and for gallbladder and bile duct drainage. Over the last years, LAMS have also been used for off-label indications including gastrojejunostomy, gastro-gastrostomy and drainage of postsurgical collections. We aimed to analyze indications, technical/clinical success rates and complications of all LAMS placed over the last 2 years.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data from 61 consecutive LAMS (Hot Axios, Boston Scientific) in 57 patients were analyzed. Technical success was defined as successful deployment of the LAMS in the desired position. Clinical success was defined as follows: for pancreatic collections: resolution without the need for non-endoscopic interventions; for choledochoduodenostomy: ≥ 50% drop in baseline serum bilirubin within 2 weeks AND patient can receive chemotherapy if indicated; for gastrojejunostomy: resolution of gastric outlet obstruction and successful re-initiation of oral intake; for gastro-gastrostomy: successful endoscopic access to the excluded stomach; for gallbladder or postsurgical collection drainage: resolution of sepsis.

RESULTS

Indications were drainage of peripancreatic collections in 24 cases (39.3%), choledochoduodenostomy in 13 (21.3%), gastrojejunostomy in 6 (9.8%), gastro-gastrostomy in 13 (21.3%), gallbladder drainage in 1 (1.6%) and postsurgical collection drainage in 4 (6.6%). Overall technical and clinical success rates were high (57/61; 93.4% and 54/61; 88.5%, respectively). Clinical success rate for non-approved indications was 95.6% (22/23 cases). Complications occurred in 13 patients (21.3%, 4 serious).

CONCLUSIONS

LAMS are increasingly used in interventional endoscopy. In our cohort, more than one third of LAMS are placed for off-label indications, with a high success rate and acceptable complication rate.