Acute cholecystitis is frequently encountered in daily clinical practice, and early cholecystectomy is the standard therapy. In high-risk surgical patients, such as those with advanced age, deteriorated performance status, or underlying diseases, conservative treatment is typically preferred to manage acute cholecystitis. However, in patients with a disease that is refractory to conservative treatment, drainage procedures are necessary to control the infection. At present, there are three basic approaches for gallbladder drainage: percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage, endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage, and endoscopic ultrasound gallbladder drainage. Each of these methods has advantages and disadvantages. Therefore, the appropriate treatment method is determined on a case-by-case basis, and no consistent strategy for gallbladder drainage has been established. This review aimed to summarize the characteristics of each drainage method and compare the clinical outcomes of the three procedures for acute cholecystitis in high-risk surgical patients.

Cholecystectomy (CCY) is considered the criterion standard intervention for acute cholecystitis (AC). However, EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) can be performed in patients unfit for surgery. Interval CCY after EUS-GBD is typically not performed because the formation of a cholecystoenteric fistula increases the technical complexity of CCY. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the outcomes of interval CCY after EUS-GBD.

We conducted a literature search of multiple electronic databases for studies reporting on outcomes of interval CCY after EUS-GBD. Primary outcomes were pooled proportions of technical success of interval CCY and surgical techniques (rate of open, laparoscopic, and conversion from laparoscopic to open). The secondary outcome was adverse events (AEs). A meta-analysis of proportions was performed using the random-effects model. The I2 statistic was used to assess heterogeneity.

Of 1001 citations, 15 studies with 707 patients were included. The pooled proportion of successful interval CCY was 32.9% (95% CI, 11.8-53.9%; I2 = 99%). Surgical techniques included laparoscopic CCY in 76.2% (95% CI, 61.5-91.0%; I2 = 82%), open CCY in 14.5% (95% CI, 4.2-24.8%; I2 = 82%), and conversion from laparoscopic to open CCY in 14% (95% CI, 4.1-23.8%; I2 = 77%). The pooled proportion of overall AEs was 13.2% (95% CI, 4.3-22.1%; I2 = 61%), including postoperative infection in 7.6% (95% CI, 0.7-14.6%; I2 = 65%). There was no procedure-related mortality.

Our study demonstrates that interval CCY is technically feasible and safe after EUS-GBD. Endoscopists should still consider the local surgical expertise and recommendations before performing EUS-GBD in patients who could eventually become surgical candidates afterward.

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.

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.

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).

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

Endoscopic management of benign pancreaticobiliary disorders encompasses a range of procedures designed to address complications in gallstone disease, choledocholithiasis, and pancreatic disorders. Acute cholecystitis is typically treated with cholecystectomy or percutaneous drainage (PT-GBD), but for high-risk or future surgical candidates, alternative decompression methods, such as endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETP-GBD), and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD), are effective. PT-GBD is associated with significant discomfort as well as variable adverse event rates. EUS-GBD leverages lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) for direct access to the gallbladder, providing the ability to treat an inflamed GB internally. Choledocholithiasis is primarily managed with ERCP, utilizing techniques to include balloon extraction, mechanical lithotripsy, or advanced methods such as electrohydraulic or laser lithotripsy in cases of complex stones. Altered anatomy from bariatric procedures like Roux-en-Y gastric bypass may necessitate specialized approaches, including balloon-assisted ERCP or EUS-directed transgastric ERCP (EDGE). Post-operative complications, including bile leaks and strictures, are managed endoscopically using sphincterotomy and stenting. Post-liver transplant anastomotic and non-anastomotic strictures often require repeated stent placements or advanced techniques like magnetic compression anastomosis in refractory cases. In chronic pancreatitis (CP), endoscopic approaches aim to relieve pain and address structural complications like pancreatic duct (PD) strictures and calculi. ERCP with sphincterotomy and stenting, along with extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy (ESWL), achieves effective ductal clearance for PD stones. When traditional approaches are insufficient, direct visualization with peroral pancreatoscopy-assisted lithotripsy is utilized. EUS-guided interventions, such as cystgastrostomy, pancreaticogastrostomy, and celiac plexus blockade, offer alternative therapeutic options for pain management and drainage of peripancreatic fluid collections. EUS plays a diagnostic and therapeutic role in CP, with procedures tailored for high-risk patients or those with complex anatomy. As techniques evolve, endoscopic management provides minimally invasive alternatives for patients with complex benign pancreaticobiliary conditions, offering high clinical success and fewer complications.

EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) using lumen apposing metal stents (LAMS) has excellent technical and short-term clinical success for acute cholecystitis (AC). The goals of this study were to determine the long-term clinical outcomes and adverse events (AEs) of EUS-GBD with LAMS.

A multicenter, retrospective study was conducted at 18 US tertiary care institutions. Inclusion criteria: any AC patient with attempted EUS-GBD with LAMS and minimum 30-day post-procedure follow-up. Long-term clinical success was defined as absence of recurrent acute cholecystitis (RAC) > 30 days and long-term AE was defined as occurring > 30 days from the index procedure.

A total of 109 patients were included. Technical success was achieved in 108 of 109 (99.1%) and initial clinical success in 106 of 109 (97.2%). Long-term clinical success was achieved in 98 of 109 (89.9%) over a median follow-up of 140 days (range 30-1188). On multivariable analysis (MVA), acalculous cholecystitis (odds ratio [OR] 15.93, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.22-208.52, P = 0.04) and the occurrence of a LAMS-specific AE (OR 63.60, 95% CI 5.08-799.29, P <0.01) were associated with RAC. AEs occurred in 38 of 109 patients (34.9%) at any time, and in 10 of 109 (9.17%) > 30 days from the index procedure. Most long-term AEs (7 of 109; 6.42%) were LAMS-specific. No technical or clinical factors were associated with occurrence of AEs. LAMS were removed in 24 of 109 patients (22%). There was no difference in RAC or AEs whether LAMS was removed or not.

EUS-GBD with LAMS has a high rate of long-term clinical success and modest AE rates in patients with AC and is a reasonable destination therapy for high-risk surgical candidates.

With technological advances in endoscopic ultrasonography, endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) was introduced as a treatment option for acute cholecystitis. Recently, new studies have emerged, suggesting that EUS-GBD has a lower adverse event rate and reintervention rate, when compared to percutaneous drainage and endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage. There is growing interest in the different technical aspects of EUS-GBD, such as the puncture approach, choice of stents, and long-term management. There are also cohorts on performing EUS-GBD in potential surgical candidates. This review article gathers the latest evidence on EUS-GBD, including its indications, procedural techniques, choice of equipment, outcomes, postprocedural care, and the controversial extended indications.

Over the last 40 years, the role of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) has evolved from being diagnostic to therapeutic. EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) and EUS-guided gastroenterostomy (EUS-GE) are emerging techniques in recent years; however, there are limited studies and inconsistent results regarding these techniques. In addition, EUS has become a more common alternative to traditional interventions due to its super minimally invasive nature, but the mobility of both the gallbladder and intestine makes it challenging to introduce stents. An increasing number of researchers are dedicating themselves to solving this problem, leading to the development of various assisted technologies. Consequently, this review focused on the comparison of EUS-GBD and EUS-GE with other alternative approaches and explored the various assisted techniques employed for EUS-GBD and EUS-GE.

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

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.

The gallbladder (GB) is a susceptible organ, prone to various pathologies that can be identified using different imaging techniques. Transabdominal ultrasound (TUS) is typically the initial diagnostic method due to its numerous well-established advantages. However, in cases of uncertainty or when a definitive diagnosis cannot be established, computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging may be employed to provide more detailed information. Nevertheless, CT scans may sometimes offer inadequate spatial resolution, which can limit the differentiation of GB lesions, particularly when smaller yet clinically relevant abnormalities are involved. Conversely, endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) provides higher frequency compared to TUS, superior spatial resolution, and the option for contrast-enhanced harmonic imaging, enabling a more comprehensive examination. Thus, EUS can serve as a supplementary tool when conventional imaging methods are insufficient. This review will describe the standard EUS examination of the GB, focusing on its endosonographic characteristics in various GB pathologies.

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.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage for patients with cholecystitis and high surgical risk is commonly performed by dilating the fistula before inserting the delivery sheath; however, this carries an increased risk of peritonitis. To overcome this problem, we developed a new technique that did not require dilation, using a 0.035-inch stiff guidewire, and retrospectively evaluated the efficacy and safety of this technique. This retrospective case series report collected data on non-surgical patients who underwent endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage for various indications at Steel Memorial Muroran Hospital between November 2020 and October 2022. A total of 71 patients were included (mean age 83 ± 7.6 years; 33 women and 38 men). Breakthrough of the delivery sheath without dilation of the fistula was successful in 97.2% (n = 69) of patients. The success rate of stent placement was 98.6% (n = 70), as was the clinical success rate. Complications occurred in 2.8% (n = 2) of patients. Early and late adverse events occurred in 2.8% (n = 2) and 12.7% (n = 9) of patients, respectively. The mean procedure time was 24.8 ± 9.3 min. If a 0.035-inch stiff guidewire is used, the dilation procedure can be omitted in the endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage using self-expandable metal stents.

Although endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) using lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) has become one of the treatments of choice for acute cholecystitis (AC) in fragile patients, scant data are available on real-life settings and long-term outcomes.

We performed a multicenter retrospective study including EUS-guided GBD using LAMS for AC in 19 Italian centers from June 2014 to July 2020. The primary outcomes were technical and clinical success, and the secondary outcomes were the rate of adverse events (AE) and long-term follow-up.

In total, 116 patients (48.3% female) were included, with a mean age of 82.7 ± 11 years. LAMS were placed, transgastric in 44.8% of cases, transduodenal in 53.3% and transjejunal in 1.7%, in patients with altered anatomy. Technical success was achieved in 94% and clinical success in 87.1% of cases. The mean follow-up was 309 days. AEs occurred in 12/116 pts (10.3%); 8/12 were intraprocedural, while 1 was classified as early (<15 days) and 3 as delayed (>15 days). According to the ASGE lexicon, two (16.7%) were mild, three (25%) were moderate, and seven (58.3%) were severe. No fatal AEs occurred. In subgroup analysis of 40 patients with a follow-up longer than one year, no recurrence of AC was observed.

EUS-GBD had high technical and clinical success rates, despite the non-negligible rate of AEs, thus representing an effective treatment option for fragile patients.

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.

This narrative review provides an overview of the utilization of endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) as a salvage approach in cases of unsuccessful conventional management. EUS-GBD is a minimally invasive and effective technique for drainage in patients with acute cholecystitis with high risk of surgery. The procedure has demonstrated impressive technical and clinical success rates with low rates of adverse events, making it a safe and effective option for appropriate candidates. Furthermore, EUS-GBD can also serve as a rescue option for patients who have failed endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography or EUS biliary drainage for relief of jaundice in malignant biliary stricture. However, patient selection is critical for the success of EUS-GBD, and proper patient selection and risk assessment are important to ensure the safety and efficacy of the procedure. As the field continues to evolve and mature, ongoing research will further refine our understanding of the benefits and limitations of EUS-GBD, ultimately leading to improved outcomes for patients.

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.

The minimally invasive approach of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided procedures for cholecystocholedocholithiasis, such as EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD), EUS-guided rendezvous (EUS-RV), and EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD), is affirmed as an effective treatment for patients with acute cholecystitis (AC) who are unfit for surgery and for patients with common bile duct stones (CBDSs) who have experienced a previous ERCP failure. Furthermore, in cases of difficult CBDS extraction during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), cholangioscopy-guided electrohydraulic lithotripsy (CS-EHL) has showed optimal results. The main objective of our study was to evaluate the effectiveness of EUS-GBD and percutaneous gallbladder drainage (PT-GBD) in patients with AC who are unfit for surgery. We also aimed to evaluate the efficacy of EUS-GBD, EUS-BD, and EUS-RV following ERCP failure and the effectiveness of CS-EHL for difficult CBDS extraction in our hospital. The secondary aim was to examine the safety of these procedures.

We conducted a retrospective evaluation of all the EUS-GBD, PT-GBD, EUS-BD, EUS-RV, and CS-EHL procedures, which were prospectively collected in the gastroenterology and digestive endoscopy unit and the general surgery unit from January 2020 to June 2023. The efficacy was expressed in terms of technical and clinical success rates, while safety was assessed based on the rate of adverse events (AEs).

We enrolled 83 patients with AC and high surgical risk. Among them, 57 patients (68.7%, 24/57 male, median age 85 ± 11 years) underwent EUS-GBD, and 26 (31.3%, 19/26 male, median age 83 ± 7 years) underwent PT-GBD. The technical and clinical success rates were 96.5 and 100% for EUS-GBD, and 96.1 and 92% for PT-GBD. The AEs for EUS-GBD were 1.7%, and for PT-GBD, it was 12%. ERCP for CBDS extraction failed in 77 patients. Among them, 73 patients (94.8%) underwent EUS-RV with technical and clinical success rates of 72.6% (53/73) and 100%, respectively. No AEs were reported. Four out of 77 patients were directly treated with EUS-BD for pyloric inflammatory stenosis. In 12 patients (16.4%), following unsuccessful EUS-RV with a CBD diameter ≥ 12 mm, an EUS-BD was performed. Both technical and clinical success rates for EUS-BD were 100%, and no AEs were reported. EUS-GBD was the treatment of choice for the remaining 8 (10.9%) patients after failure of both ERCP and EUS-RV. The procedure had high technical and clinical success rates (both at 100%), and no AEs were reported. The 12 difficult CBDS extraction treated with CS-EHL also showed high technical and clinical success rates (both at 100%), with no reported AEs.

The minimally invasive approach for cholecystocholedocholithiasis, especially EUS-guided procedures, had high efficacy and safety in treating AC in high-risk surgical patients and CBDS extraction after a previously unsuccessful ERCP.

Acute cholecystitis is a significant adverse event after self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) placement for malignant biliary obstruction (MBO); however, no appropriate treatment strategy has been established for its management.

This study aimed to examine the feasibility and utility of endoscopic ultrasound-guided naso-gallbladder drainage (EUS-NGBD) for the management of acute cholecystitis occurring after SEMS placement.

This retrospective study investigated consecutive patients with acute cholecystitis after SEMS placement for unresectable MBO, in whom EUS-NGBD was attempted. The study outcomes included technical success, clinical success, procedure time, adverse event, and cholecystitis recurrence, associated with the procedure.

During the study period, EUS-NGBD was performed for SEMS-related acute cholecystitis in 30 patients with MBO. The technical and clinical success rates were 96.7% (29/30) and 96.6% (28/29), respectively. The median procedure time was 15 min, and rate of procedure-related adverse event was 3.3% (1/30). The median duration from the procedure to tube removal was 9 days. No adverse events were observed after removal. The median hospitalization duration after the procedure was 14 days, and the median duration to the (re-)start of chemotherapy from cholecystitis onset was 13 days. The median overall survival after EUS-NGBD was 123 days, and the rate of cholecystitis recurrence until death was 4.2% (1/28).

This study demonstrated that EUS-NGBD possesses good technical and clinical feasibility with an acceptable adverse event rates and short hospitalization and chemotherapy withdrawal period. Therefore, EUS-NGBD may be a good option for the treatment of SEMS-related cholecystitis in patients with MBO.

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

Endoscopic ultrasound guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) is being increasingly used in practice (either as a bridge to cholecystectomy in high-risk patients or as destination therapy in non-surgical patients). Stents are used to create a conduit between the lumen of the gallbladder (GB) and the intestinal lumen through the gastric or enteric routes. Among the various types of stents used, cautery-enhanced lumen apposing metallic stents (LAMS) may be associated with fewer adverse events (AEs).

To compare the clinical success, technical success, and rate of AEs between transgastric (TG) and trans-enteric [transduodenal (TD)/transjejunal (TJ)] approach to GB drainage. Further, we analyzed whether using cautery enhanced stents during EUS-GBD impacts the above parameters.

Study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022319019) and comprehensive literature review was conducted. Manuscripts were reviewed for the data collection: Rate of AEs, clinical success, and technical success. Random effects model was utilized for the analysis.

No statistically significant difference in clinical and technical success between the TD/TJ and TG approaches (P > 0.05) were noted. There was no statistically significant difference in the rate of AEs when comparing two-arm studies only. However, when all studies were included in the analysis difference was almost significant favoring the TD/TJ approach. When comparing cautery-enhanced LAMS with non-cautery enhanced LAMS, a statistically significant difference in the rate of AEs was observed when all the studies were included, with the rate being higher in non-cautery enhanced stents (14.0% vs 37.8%; P < 0.01).

As per our study results, TD/TJ approach appears to be associated with lower rate of adverse events and comparable efficacy when compared to the TG approach for the EUS-GBD. Additionally, use of cautery-enhanced LAMS for EUS-GBD is associated with a more favorable adverse event profile compared to cold LAMS. Though the approach chosen depends on several patient and physician factors, the above findings could help in deciding the ideal drainage route when both TG and TD/TJ approaches are feasible.

The transcendence of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) from diagnostic to therapeutic tool has revolutionized management options in the field of gastroenterology. Through EUS-guided methods, pancreaticobiliary obstruction can now be utilized as an alternative to surgical and percutaneous approaches. This modality also allows for gallbladder drainage in patients who are not ideal operative candidates. By utilizing its unique imaging capabilities, EUS also allows for drainage access points in cases of gastric outlet obstruction as well as windows to ablate pancreatic cystic lesions. As technical progress continues to evolve, interventional gastroenterology continues to push the envelope of minimally invasive therapeutic procedures in a multidisciplinary setting. In this comprehensive review, we set out to describe current indications and innovations through EUS.

To compare the complication rate and clinical outcomes for percutaneous cholecystostomy (PC) in patients with or without coagulopathy.

We retrospectively reviewed electronic medical chart of patients who underwent ultrasound-guided PC with a 8.5-F drainage tube for acute cholecystitis between November 2003 and March 2017. We divided the patients into two groups: patients with coagulopathy (international normalized ratio > 1.5 or platelet count < 50 × 109/L or with a history of anticoagulant medication in preceding 5 days) and patients without coagulopathy. Duration of drainage, duration of hospital stay, 30-day mortality and complication rates were compared between these two groups. Student's t test, Chi-square test or Fisher's exact test was used for bivariate analyses. Age, age-adjusted Charlson Comorbidity Index (ACCI) and sepsis-adjusted complication rates were also compared.

In total, 141 patients had PC (mean age was 73.3 years [SD 13.3]; range 33-96 years; 94 men and 47 women). Fifty-two patients (36.9%) had coagulopathy and 89 patients (63.1%) were without any history of coagulopathy. Hemorrhagic complication rate was 3.5% (5 out of 141 patients, including 4 with coagulopathy and 1 without). One patient with coagulopathy died due to the hemorrhage. Duration of drainage was longer in patients with coagulopathy than patients without coagulopathy (20.0 days vs. 14.8 days; P = 0.033). No significant difference was observed with regard to duration of hospital stay (32.3 days vs. 25.6 days; P = 0.103) and 30-day mortality (7.7% vs. 1.1%; P = 0.062). The overall complication rate did not significantly differ (9.6% and 11.2%; P = 0.763), nor did age, ACCI or sepsis-adjusted complications.

Clinical outcomes and complications rates after PC did not statistically differ between patients with and without coagulopathy, but there was a tendency of higher risk of hemorrhage in coagulopathy patients. Therefore, the indication of this procedure should be carefully determined.

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) using a lumen-apposing metal stent (LAMS).

For patients with acute cholecystitis who are poor surgical candidates, EUS-GBD using a LAMS is an important treatment alternative to percutaneous gallbladder drainage.

We conducted a regulatory-compliant, prospective multicenter trial at 7 tertiary referral centers in the United States of America and Belgium. Thirty consecutive patients with mild or moderate acute cholecystitis who were not candidates for cholecystectomy were enrolled between September 2019 and August 2021. Eligible patients had a LAMS placed transmurally with 30 to 60-day indwell if removal was clinically indicated, and 30-day follow-up post-LAMS removal. Endpoints included days until acute cholecystitis resolution, reintervention rate, acute cholecystitis recurrence rate, and procedure-related adverse events (AEs).

Technical success was 93.3% (28/30) for LAMS placement and 100% for LAMS removal in 19 patients for whom removal was attempted. Five (16.7%) patients required reintervention. Mean time to acute cholecystitis resolution was 1.6±1.5 days. Acute cholecystitis symptoms recurred in 10.0% (3/30) after LAMS removal. Five (16.7%) patients died from unrelated causes. Procedure-related AEs were reported to the FDA in 30.0% (9/30) of patients, including one fatal event 21 days after LAMS removal; however, no AEs were causally related to the LAMS.

For selected patients with acute cholecystitis who are at elevated surgical risk, EUS-GBD with LAMS is an alternative to percutaneous gallbladder drainage. It has high technical and clinical success, with low recurrence and an acceptable AE rate. Clinicaltrials.gov, Number: NCT03767881.

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.

Indications for endoscopic placement of endoluminal and transluminal stents have greatly expanded over time. Endoscopic stent placement is now a well-established approach for the treatment of benign and malignant biliary and pancreatic diseases (ie, obstructive jaundice, intra-abdominal fluid collections, chronic pancreatitis etc.). Ongoing refinement of technical approaches and development of novel stents is increasing the applicability and success of pancreatico-biliary stenting. In this review, we discuss the important developments in the field of pancreatico-biliary stenting, with a specific focus on endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and endoscopic ultrasound-associated developments.

Cholecystectomy (CCY) is the gold standard treatment of acute cholecystitis (AC). Nonsurgical management of AC includes percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PT-GBD) and endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD). This study aims to compare outcomes of patients who undergo CCY after having received EUS-GBD vs PT-GBD.

A multicenter international study was conducted in patients with AC who underwent EUS-GBD or PT-GBD, followed by an attempted CCY, between January 2018 and October 2021. Demographics, clinical characteristics, procedural details, postprocedure outcomes, and surgical details and outcomes were compared.

One hundred thirty-nine patients were included: EUS-GBD in 46 patients (27% male, mean age 74 years) and PT-GBD in 93 patients (50% male, mean age 72 years). Surgical technical success was not significantly different between the 2 groups. In the EUS-GBD group, there was decreased operative time (84.2 vs 165.4 minutes, P < 0.00001), time to symptom resolution (4.2 vs 6.3 days, P = 0.005), and length of stay (5.4 vs 12.3 days, P = 0.001) compared with the PT-GBD group. There was no difference in the rate of conversion from laparoscopic to open CCY: 5 of 46 (11%) in the EUS-GBD arm and 18 of 93 (19%) in the PT-GBD group ( P value 0.2324).

Patients who received EUS-GBD had a significantly shorter interval between gallbladder drainage and CCY, shorter surgical procedure times, and shorter length of stay for the CCY compared with those who received PT-GBD. EUS-GBD should be considered an acceptable modality for gallbladder drainage and should not preclude patients from eventual CCY.

Endoscopic gallbladder drainage is a feasible and efficacious alternative to percutaneous drainage in the management of acute cholecystitis for high-risk surgical candidates. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage and per-oral cholecystoscopy is facilitated by the use of lumen-apposing metal stents. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage should be performed by those expert in advanced therapeutic endoscopic ultrasound. Multidisciplinary collaboration between interventional radiology and surgery is paramount in the care of these patients. Choosing the optimal drainage method is dependent on individual patient characteristics.

This commentary was drawn from a review of the literature to provide practical advice. Because this was not a systematic review, we did not perform any formal rating of the quality of evidence or strength of the presented considerations. This expert commentary was commissioned and approved by the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute Clinical Practice Updates Committee and the AGA Governing Board to provide timely guidance on a topic of high clinical importance to the AGA membership, and underwent internal peer-review by the Clinical Practice Updates Committee and external peer-review through standard procedures of Clinical Gastroenterology and Hepatology.

This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage and percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage as a bridge to surgery in patients with acute cholecystitis unfit for urgent cholecystectomy.

This retrospective study included 46 patients who underwent cholecystectomy following endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) or percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PTGBD) for acute cholecystitis in NTT Tokyo Medical Center. We surveyed 35 patients as the EUS-GBD group and 11 patients as the PTGBD group, and compared the rate of technical success of the cholecystectomy and periprocedural adverse events. A 7-F, 10-cm double pigtail plastic stent was used for ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage.

The rate of technical success of cholecystectomy was 100% in both groups. Regarding postsurgical adverse events, no significant difference was noted between the two groups (EUS-GBD group, 11.4%, vs. PTGBD group, 9.0%; p = 0.472).

EUS-GBD as a BTS seems to be an alternative for patients with AC because it can ensure lower adverse events. On the other hand, there are two major limitations in this study--the sample size is small and there is a risk of selection bias.

Although long-term stent placement using endoscopic gallbladder stenting (EGBS) reportedly reduces cholecystitis recurrence in patients unfit to undergo cholecystectomy, its efficacy and safety remain uncertain.

This study aimed to examine the long-term effect of EGBS in poor surgical candidates of cholecystectomy.

A total of 528 high-risk surgical patients with acute calculous cholecystitis met this study's eligibility criteria. The technical success and adverse events (AE) were compared between patients who underwent EGBS and those who underwent percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PTGBD). Elective stent exchange and removal were not performed after EGBS. The external tube was removed after improvement of cholecystitis following PTGBD.

The technical success rate was significantly lower with EGBS compared to PTGBD (75.4% versus 98.7%, P < 0.001), while the early-AE rate did not differ significantly between the two methods (7.7% versus 4.3%, P = 0.146). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year cumulative incidence rates of cholecystitis were 3.8%, 7.2%, and 7.2% with EGBS, and 11.7%, 17.6%, and 30.2% with PTGBD, respectively (P = 0.001). Conversely, those of symptomatic late-AE (except cholecystitis) were 8.2%, 22.7%, and 31.4% with EGBS, and 7.5%, 10.9%, and 13.1% with PTGBD, respectively (P = 0.035). Thus, the 1-, 3-, and 5-year cumulative incidence of overall late-AE was 12.0%, 30.4%, and 40.4% with EGBS, and 19.2%, 28.3%, and 42.5% with PTGBD, respectively (P = 0.649).

Long-term stent placement via EGBS is useful for preventing the recurrence of cholecystitis, but the success rate is low and the frequency of other late-AE increases with the prolongation of the indwelling period.

Surgical cholecystectomy is the gold standard strategy for the management of acute cholecystitis (AC). However, some patients are considered unfit for surgery due to certain comorbid conditions. As such, we aimed to compare less invasive treatment strategies such as endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) and percutaneous gallbladder drainage (PT-GBD) for the management of patients with AC who are suboptimal candidates for surgical cholecystectomy.

A comprehensive search of multiple electronic databases was performed to identify all the studies comparing EUS-GBD versus PT-GBD for patients with AC who were unfit for surgery. A subgroup analysis was also performed for comparison of the group undergoing drainage via cautery-enhanced lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) versus PT-GBD. The outcomes included technical and clinical success, adverse events (AEs), recurrent cholecystitis, reintervention, and hospital readmission.

Eleven studies including 1155 patients were included in the statistical analysis. There was no difference between PT-GBD and EUS-GBD in all the evaluated outcomes. On the subgroup analysis, the endoscopic approach with cautery-enhanced LAMS was associated with lower rates of adverse events (RD =  - 0.33 (95% CI - 0.52 to - 0.14; p = 0.0006), recurrent cholecystitis (- 0.05 RD (95% CI - 0.09 to - 0.02; p = 0.02), and hospital readmission (- 0.36 RD (95% CI-0.70 to - 0.03; p = 0.03) when compared to PT-GBD. All other outcomes were similar in the subgroup analyses.

EUS-GBD using cautery-enhanced LAMS is superior to PT-GBD in terms of safety profile, recurrent cholecystitis, and hospital readmission rates in the management of patients with acute cholecystitis who are suboptimal candidates for cholecystectomy. However, when cautery-enhanced LAMS are not used, the outcomes of EUS-GBD and PT-GBD are similar. Thus, EUS-GBD with cautery-enhanced LAMS should be considered the preferable approach for gallbladder drainage for this challenging population.

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.

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.

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).

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.