Endoscopic Transpapillary Gallbladder Drainage Research Articles

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

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

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

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

Evaluation of the Validity of Endoscopic Transpapillary Gallbladder Drainage for Acute Cholecystitis Based on the Tokyo Guidelines 2018.

We evaluated the validity of endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETGBD) as a bridging therapy prior to elective Lap-C for the patients with acute cholecystitis (AC). The Tokyo Guidelines 2018 recommend early laparoscopic cholecystectomy (Lap-C) for patients with AC, however, some patients require the preoperative drainage because of inadequate for early Lap-C du to background and comorbidities. We performed a retrospective cohort analysis using data from our hospital records from 2018-2021. In total, 71 cases of 61 patients with AC underwent ETGBD. The technical success rate was 85.9%. Patients in the failure group had more complicated branching of the cystic duct. The length of time until feeding was started and until WBC levels normalized, and the length of hospital stay were significantly shorter in the success group. The median waiting period for surgery was 39 days in the ETGBD success cases. The median operating time, amount of bleeding, and length of postoperative hospital stay were 134 min, 83.2g, and 4 days, respectively. In patients who underwent Lap-C, the waiting period for surgery and the operating time were similar between the ETGBD success and failure groups. However, the temporary discharge period after drainage and the length of postoperative hospital stay were significantly longer in the patients with ETGBD failure. Our study revealed that ETGBD has equivalent efficacy prior to elective Lap-C despite some challenges that lower its success rate. Preoperativ ETGBD can improve patient quality of life by eliminating the need for a drainage tube.

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

Background and study aimsCholecystitis can occur after self-expandable metallic stent (SEMS) placement for malignant biliary obstructions (MBO). Furthermore, 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. Patients and MethodsIncidence, treatments, and predictive factors of cholecystitis were retrospectively evaluated in 1,084 patients with distal MBO (DMBO) and 353 patients with hilar MBO (HMBO) who underwent SEMS placement at the 12 institutions from January 2012 to March 2021. ResultsCholecystitis occurred in 7.5% of patients with DMBO and 5.9% of patients with HMBO. The recurrence rate was significantly lower (p=0.043), and the recurrence-free period was significantly longer (p=0.039) in endoscopic procedures than in percutaneous procedures for cholecystitis treatment. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) was better in terms of technical success, procedure time, and recurrence-free period than endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage. The cases with obstruction across the cystic duct orifice by tumor (p=0.015) and those with obstruction by stent (p=0.037) were the independent risk factors for cholecystitis in DMBO. The cases with multiple SEMS placements (OR 11, 95% CI 0.68–190, p=0.091) and those with gallbladder stones (OR 2.3, 95% CI 0.92–5.6, p=0.075) had a higher risk for cholecystitis in HMBO. ConclusionsThe incidences of cholecystitis after SEMS placement for DMBO and HMBO were comparable. EUS-GBD is the optimal treatment option for patients with cholecystitis after SEMS placement for MBO.

A Review on Endoscopic Management of Acute Cholecystitis: Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Gallbladder Drainage and Endoscopic Transpapillary Gallbladder Drainage.

A percutaneous cholecystostomy tube (PCT) is the conventionally favored nonoperative intervention for treating acute cholecystitis. However, PCT is beset by high adverse event rates, need for scheduled reintervention, and inadvertent dislodgement, as well as patient dissatisfaction with a percutaneous drain. Recent advances in endoscopic therapy involve the implementation of endoscopic transpapillary drainage (ETP-GBD) and endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD), which are increasingly preferred over PCT due to their favorable technical and clinical success combined with lower complication rates. In this article, we provide a comprehensive review of the literature on EUS-GBD and ETP-GBD, delineating instances when clinicians should opt for endoscopic management and highlighting potential risks associated with each approach.

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

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

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.

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

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. 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). 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. 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.

S54 Endoscopic Transpapillary Gallbladder Drainage With Two Stents Reduces the Need for Re-Intervention Compared to Single Stent

S54 Endoscopic Transpapillary Gallbladder Drainage With Two Stents Reduces the Need for Re-Intervention Compared to Single Stent

S2629 Cholangioscopy-Assisted Endoscopic Transpapillary Gallbladder Drainage in a Decompensated Cirrhotic Patient With Chronic Cholecystitis

S2629 Cholangioscopy-Assisted Endoscopic Transpapillary Gallbladder Drainage in a Decompensated Cirrhotic Patient With Chronic Cholecystitis

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.

Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage using a tapered endoscopic sheath.

Watch a video of this article.

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

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

Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage with "hooking technique" using a rotatable sphincterotome.

Watch a video of this article.

A novel technique of endoscopic introducer-assisted transpapillary gallbladder aspiration prior to drainage in a patient with acute cholecystitis.

Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ET-GBD) is the preferred technique in patients with acute cholecystitis and cholangitis [1]. Meta-analyses have reported technical and clinical success rates of 83 % and 88.1 % respectively [1] [2]. Aspiration of the infected bile and saline irrigation using nasobiliary drainage is an acceptable method [1]; however, the performance of this maneuver during ET-GBD is time-consuming because of the high viscosity of the bile and the small caliber of the conventional endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography catheter. Endoscopic introducer-assisted procedures have recently emerged as effective pancreaticobiliary interventions [3] [4]. This article describes gallbladder aspiration and irrigation using a novel dual-structure catheter.

Ruptured cystic artery pseudoaneurysm after long-term transpapillary placement of a gallbladder stent for acute cholecystitis.

Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETGBD), including endoscopic gallbladder stenting (EGBS), has utility in the management of acute cholecystitis in patients considered to be high risk candidates for surgery [1]. A recent meta-analysis reported that the pooled rate of cholecystitis recurrence was 4.6 % following ETGBD in patients with acute cholecystitis [2]. Long-term biliary drainage via EGBS is often performed to prevent the recurrence of cholecystitis in patients with contraindications to cholecystectomy.

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

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

Efficacy of endoscopic trans-papillary gallbladder stenting and drainage in acute calculous cholecystitis in high-risk patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Acute calculous cholecystitis (ACC) represents about one-third of all surgical emergencies. The gold standard management of ACC is laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Although cholecystectomy is a safe procedure, it may be dangerous and contraindicated in patients with complex comorbidities. Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder stenting (ETGBS) and drainage had been widely used to manage patients suffering from ACC with comorbidities. We searched PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library for relevant studies assessing the use of ETGBS in patients suffering from ACC with various comorbidities. Risk of bias assessment was performed using the National Institues of Health (NIH) tool. We included the following outcomes: clinical success, technical success, late complications, and pancreatitis. We included seven studies that met our inclusion criteria. We found that the pooled proportion of clinical success, technical success, late complications, and pancreatitis was [91.3%, 95% confidence interval (CI) (86.8%, 95.9%)], [92.8%, 95% CI (89%, 96.5%)], [5.4%, 95% CI (2.9%, 7.9%)], and [3.5%, 95% CI (1.2%, 5.8%)], respectively. We found that an ETGBS was an effective and well-tolerated method for the treatment of cholecystitis, especially in high-risk individuals.

Practice Patterns of Endoscopists Performing Endoscopic Gallbladder Drainage

Background and AimsThe standard of care for treatment of patients with acute cholecystitis is cholecystectomy. However, many patients are unfit for surgery due to substantial medical comorbidities, or surgery is technically challenging due to anatomic considerations. Options for patients who are not surgical candidates include percutaneous cholecystostomy tube placement by interventional radiology, endoscopic gallbladder drainage (EGBD), or conservative management. Over the last decade, techniques of EGBD have been employed for temporary or definitive gallbladder drainage in patients with acute cholecystitis who are not surgical candidates. Despite growing interest and clinical use of EGBD, little is known about practice patterns of EGBD. Our aim was to survey endoscopists to evaluate the practice patterns and technical considerations regarding EGBD. MethodsAn 18-item survey was distributed to all members of the American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Each response was included in the final analysis. Descriptive statistics were calculated using frequencies and percentages. ResultsResponses were received from 217 endoscopists. Of these, 178 perform endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder draining and 178 perform endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage. The preferred approach for EGBD was endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage in 58.8%, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)-guided transpapillary gallbladder stent placement in 30.2%, and no preference in 11%. ConclusionDespite growing interest in EGBD, significant heterogeneity in practice patterns exists. Further study is needed to better understand these differences and provide data for future guidelines.

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

BackgroundEndoscopic transpapillary gallbladder stenting (EGBS) is considered for patients with contraindications to early surgery for acute calculus cholecystitis. However, evidence regarding the long-term outcomes of EGBS is insufficient to date. The aim of the study was to evaluate the feasibility of EGBS as a bridge to or alternative to surgery when there are contraindications.MethodsWe reviewed the cases of patients who underwent EGBS using a novel spiral-shaped plastic stent for acute calculus cholecystitis between January 2011 and December 2019. We retrospectively evaluated the long-term outcomes of EGBS using a novel spiral-shaped plastic stent.ResultsForty-nine patients were included. The clinical success rate of EGBS was 97%. After EGBS, 25 patients (surgery group) underwent elective cholecystectomy and 24 patients did not (follow-up group). In the surgery group, the median period from EGBS to surgery was 93 days. There was a single late adverse event with cholecystitis recurrence. In the follow-up group, the median follow-up period was 236 days. Late adverse events were observed in eight patients, including recurrence of cholecystitis (four patients), duodenal penetration by the distal stent end (two patients), and distal stent migration (two patient). In the follow-up group, the time to recurrence of biliary obstruction was 527 days.ConclusionsEGBS with a novel spiral-shaped plastic stent is safe and effective for long-term acute calculus cholecystitis. There is a possibility of EGBS to be a bridge to surgery and a surgical alternative for acute calculus cholecystitis in patients with contraindications to early cholecystectomy.