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.

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

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETGBD) has been performed as an alternative therapy against cholecystectomy in patients with acute cholecystitis. To date, few studies have reported the safety, efficacy, and factors affecting ETGBD. We evaluated the clinical outcomes and predictors of technical failure of ETGBD. METHODS: Patients with acute cholecystitis who underwent ETGBD were retrospectively reviewed, and consecutive patients were included in the study. The technical success rate, clinical success rate, adverse events, and the predictors associated with the technical failure of ETGBD were investigated. RESULTS: A total of 242 patients were enrolled in the study. The technical success rate of ETGBD and clinical success rate of technically successful ETGBD cases were 87% and 93%, respectively. We experienced cystic duct injury in 24 patients as an ETGBD-related adverse event, and pancreatitis in 12 patients as an endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-related adverse event. Multivariate analysis indicated that cystic duct injury was the independent predictor associated with the technical failure of ETGBD (odds ratio, 11; 95% confidence interval, 3.9-29; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: ETGBD was a safe and effective treatment method for acute cholecystitis with acceptable adverse events. There was no predictor based on the information from patient characteristics; however, cystic duct injury was associated with the technical failure of ETGBD.

Accuracy of Endoscopic Transpapillary Gallbladder Drainage with Liquid-Based Cytology for Gallbladder Disease.

INTRODUCTION: Gallbladder carcinoma is often difficult to distinguish from benign gallbladder diseases. While the diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETGD) has been reported, these results were obtained retrospectively. This prospective study aimed to evaluate the cytological diagnostic accuracy of ETGD in patients with gallbladder disease. METHODS: This single-arm prospective clinical trial included a total of 35 patients scheduled to undergo ETGD between March 2017 and September 2019. A 5F pigtail nasobiliary drainage tube was inserted into the gallbladder, and bile was collected over 5 times; if ETGD failed, a drainage tube was placed into the bile duct. The endpoints were, first, the cytological diagnostic accuracy of ETGD and, second, technical success rates and adverse events. RESULTS: Of the 35 patients, 19 were finally diagnosed with gallbladder cancer. The success rate of ETGD tube insertion was 85.7%, and the morphological pattern of the cystic duct with the angle down and located on the right side had a significantly lower success rate for ETGD than that of other cystic duct patterns (odds ratio, 13.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.7-143.7; p = 0.02). Cytological samples were collected 5 times on median. The sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy in all patients were 78.9%, 100%, and 88.6%, respectively, while those in 30 patients with successful ETGD were 87.5%, 100%, and 93.3%, respectively. Adverse events occurred in 3 patients: mild pancreatitis in 1 patient and obstructive jaundice in 2 patients; all complications were resolved with conservative therapy. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS: Cytology using an ETGD tube is useful in differentiating benign and malignant gallbladder diseases (Clinical Trial Registry No. UMIN000026929).

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.

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.

Endoscopic naso-gallbladder drainage versus gallbladder stenting before cholecystectomy in patients with acute cholecystitis and a high suspicion of choledocholithiasis: a prospective randomised preliminary study.

OBJECTIVE: Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage using a nasocystic tube or plastic stent has been attempted as an alternative to percutaneous drainage for patients with acute cholecystitis who are not candidates for urgent cholecystectomy. We aimed to assess the efficacy of single-step endoscopic drainage of the common bile duct and gallbladder, and to evaluate which endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage method is ideal as a bridge before elective cholecystectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From July 2011 to December 2014, 35 patients with acute moderate-to-severe cholecystitis and a suspicion of choledocholithiasis were randomly assigned to the endoscopic naso-gallbladder drainage (ENGBD) (n = 17) or endoscopic gallbladder stenting (EGBS) (n = 18) group. RESULTS: Bile duct clearance was performed successfully in all cases. No significant differences were found between the ENGBD and EGBS groups in the technical success rates [82.4% (14/17) vs. 88.9% (16/18), p = 0.658] and clinical success rates [by intention-to-treat analysis: 70.6% (12/17) vs. 83.3% (15/18), p = 0.443; by per protocol analysis of technically feasible cases: 85.7% (12/14) vs. 93.8% (15/16), p = 0.586]. Three ENGBD patients and two EGBS patients experienced adverse events (p = 0.658). No significant differences were found in operation time or rate of conversion to open cholecystectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Single-step endoscopic transpapillary drainage of the common bile duct and gallbladder seems to be an acceptable therapeutic modality in patients with acute cholecystitis and a suspicion of choledocholithiasis. There were no significant differences in the technical and clinical outcomes between ENGBD and EGBS as a bridge before cholecystectomy.

Acute cholecystitis associated with a novel integrated biliary stent and nasobiliary drainage catheter system.

A novel biliary drainage system consisting of an integrated biliary stent and nasobiliary drainage catheter system is expected to be clinically useful. However, Yamamoto and colleagues report two cases of acute cholecystitis after use of the system, suggesting that there are risks of adverse events associated with its unique design.

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.

The Double-Max method: a novel method for gallbladder epithelial biopsy.

Video 1A novel biopsy method for gallbladder epithelial biopsy.

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

Background and aim: Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETGBD) is widely performed. However, there is no consensus on the appropriate diameter, length, and shape of the stent that should be used in this procedure. In addition, there are limited data on the outcomes of permanent ETGBD. In our facility, a stent with a novel spiral structure (IYO-stent) is permanently placed in patients with acute cholecystitis who are not indicated for surgery. This study examined the efficacy and safety of the IYO-stent in cases of permanent ETGBD. Methods: We retrospectively examined patients who underwent permanent ETGBD using the IYO-stent from April 2018 to December 2020. Results: Eleven patients were included in this study. The technical success and the clinical success rate were 91%. One patient had a post-procedure adverse event (post-endoscopic sphincterotomy bleeding). Within the median observation period of 312 days (range: 109-742), late adverse events, including cholangitis (n = 1) and incomplete stent migration (n = 1), were observed. However, none of the patients experienced cholecystitis relapse. Conclusion: Permanent ETGBD with IYO-stent is an effective treatment for the patients with acute cholecystitis who are not indicated for surgery.

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.

Double-guidewire technique for endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder stenting.

Highlight Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder stenting is effective for acute cholecystitis with high surgical risk. However, looping of the guidewire in the cystic duct sometimes impedes placement of the stent. Nakahara and colleagues present a case of successful endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder stenting after straightening the looped guidewire using a double-guidewire technique.

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.

Endoscopic Transpapillary Gallbladder Drainage in a Patient with Billroth-II Reconstruction.

Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETGBD) is an established procedure and is listed in the Tokyo guidelines 2018. Although there are many reports of ETGBD in normal anatomy cases, it is rarely performed for patients with a surgically altered anatomy. We herein report the case of a patient who underwent ETGBD with Billroth-II reconstruction. ETGBD could be an effective treatment option even for patients with a surgically altered anatomy.

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 Influence of Pre-Procedural Imaging and Cystic Duct Cholangiography on Endoscopic Transpapillary Gallbladder Drainage in Acute Cholecystitis.

Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETGBD) for acute cholecystitis is challenging. We evaluated the influence of pre-procedural imaging and cystic duct cholangiography on ETGBD. Patients who underwent ETGBD for acute cholecystitis were retrospectively examined. The rate of gallbladder contrast on cholangiography, the accuracy of cystic duct direction and location by computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP), and the relationship between pre-procedural imaging and the technical success of ETGBD were investigated. A total of 145 patients were enrolled in this study. Gallbladder contrast on cholangiography was observed in 29 patients. The accuracy of cystic duct direction and location (proximal or distal, right or left, and cranial or caudal) by CT were, respectively, 79%, 60%, and 58% by CT and 68%, 55%, and 58% by MRCP. Patients showing gallbladder contrast on cholangiography underwent ETGBD with a significantly shorter procedure time and a lower rate of cystic duct injury. No other factors affecting procedure time, technical success, and cystic duct injury were identified. Pre-procedural evaluation of cystic duct direction and location by CT or MRCP was difficult in patients with acute cholecystitis. Patients who showed gallbladder contrast on cholangiography showed a shorter procedure time and a lower rate of cystic duct injury.

Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage for management of acute cholecystitis with coagulopathy.

Acute cholecystitis is a common and frequently occurring disease, and laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the preferred treatment method. Percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage is regarded as the first-line palliative procedure for elderly patients with poor cardiopulmonary function who cannot tolerate general anesthesia. However, for patients with acute cholecystitis who are undergoing treatment with oral antithrombotics or who have abnormal coagulation mechanisms, endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage may be a good choice. Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage is an endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography-based technique that drains the gallbladder by placing a tube into the cavity of the gallbladder though the cystic gall duct. It is the application of the concept of natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery in the biliary system. This technique can not only achieve gallbladder drainage but can also minimize the risk of procedure-induced bleeding. In this paper, we describe a representative case to introduce the key points of this procedure and the associated clinical care, hoping to provide useful information for clinicians and nurses.

A New Technique of Endoscopic Transpapillary Gallbladder Drainage Combined with Intraductal Ultrasonography for the Treatment of Acute Cholecystitis.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETGBD) is useful for the treatment of acute cholecystitis; however, the technique is difficult to perform. When intraductal ultrasonography (IDUS) is combined with ETGBD, the orifice of the cystic duct in the common bile duct may be more easily detected in the cannulation procedure. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of ETGBD with IDUS compared with that of ETGBD alone. METHODS: A total of 100 consecutive patients with acute cholecystitis requiring ETGBD were retrospectively recruited. The first 50 consecutive patients were treated using ETGBD without IDUS, and the next 50 patients were treated using ETGBD with IDUS. Through propensity score matching analysis, we compared the clinical outcomes between the groups. The primary outcome was the technical success rate. RESULTS: The technical success rate of ETGBD with IDUS was significantly higher than that of ETGBD without IDUS (92.0% vs. 76.0%, p=0.044). There was no significant difference in procedure length between the two groups (74.0 min vs. 66.7 min, p=0.310). The complication rate of ETGBD with IDUS was significantly higher than that of ETGBD without IDUS (6.0% vs. 0%, p<0.001); however, only one case showed an IDUS technique-related complication (pancreatitis). CONCLUSION: The assistance of IDUS may be useful in ETGBD.

Factors affecting technical success of endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage for acute cholecystitis.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETGBD), including endoscopic nasogallbladder drainage (ENGBD) and endoscopic gallbladder stenting (EGBS), has been reported to be an effective treatment for acute cholecystitis. However, ETGBD is considered to be more difficult than percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PTGBD), and few studies have evaluated the factors that affect technical success of the procedure. We investigated the factors predicting its technical success from among patient characteristics and image findings before treatment. METHODS: Three hundred twenty three patients who underwent ETGBD for acute cholecystitis from November 2006 to December 2018 were analyzed retrospectively. RESULTS: The technical success rate was 72.8% (235/323). The technical success rate by cystic duct direction was as follows: proximal/distal, 65.9%/93.6%; right/left: 74.0%/65.2%; cranial/caudal, 83.5%/20.0%. The clinical response rate was 96.2% (226/235). Adverse events were encountered in 5.9% of cases (19/323), including cystic duct injury (11 patients), pancreatitis (five patients), and bleeding (three patients). In both univariate and multivariate analysis, presence of cystic duct stone, dilation of the common bile duct (CBD), and cystic duct direction (proximal and caudal branches) were identified as significant factors affecting technical failure of ETGBD. CONCLUSION: Although ETGBD was an effective and safe procedure for acute cholecystitis, it has a limited success rate. The presence of cystic duct stone, dilation of CBD, and cystic duct direction (proximal and caudal branches) can serve as important predictors of ETGBD difficulties. These findings should be considered before procedures and the necessary adaptation of ETGBD made.

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

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