Comparison of EUS-guided endoscopic transpapillary and percutaneous gallbladder drainage for acute cholecystitis: a systematic review with network meta-analysis

Published:September 24, 2020DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gie.2020.09.040

      Background and Aims

      The optimal method of gallbladder drainage (GBD) for acute cholecystitis in nonsurgical candidates is uncertain. The aim of the current study was to conduct a network meta-analysis comparing the 3 methods of GBD (percutaneous [PT], endoscopic transpapillary [ETP], and EUS-guided).

      Methods

      A comprehensive literature search for all comparative studies assessing the efficacy of either 2 or all modalities used for treatment of acute cholecystitis in patients at high risk for cholecystectomy was performed. Primary outcomes of technical and clinical success and postprocedure adverse events were assessed. Secondary outcomes were reintervention, unplanned readmissions, recurrent cholecystitis, and mortality.

      Results

      Ten studies were identified, comprising 1267 patients (472 EUS-GBD, 493 PT-GBD, and 302 ETP-GBD). In the network ranking estimate, PT-GBD and EUS-GBD had the highest likelihood of technical success (EUS-GBD vs PT-GBD vs ETP-GBD: 2.00 vs 1.02 vs 2.98) and clinical success (EUS-GBD vs PT-GBD vs ETP-GBD: 1.48 vs 1.55 vs 2.98). EUS-GBD had the lowest risk of recurrent cholecystitis (EUS-GBD vs PT-GBD vs ETP-GBD: 1.089 vs 2.02 vs 2.891). PT-GBD had the highest risk of reintervention (EUS-GBD vs PT-GBD vs ETP-GBD: 1.81 vs 2.99 vs 1.199) and unplanned readmissions (EUS-GBD vs PT-GBD vs ETP-GBD: 1.582 vs 2.944 vs 1.474), whereas ETP-GBD was associated with the lowest rates of mortality (EUS-GBD vs PT-GBD vs ETP-GBD: 2.62 vs 2.09 vs 1.29).

      Conclusions

      The 3 modalities of GBD have their respective advantages and disadvantages. Selection of technique will depend on available expertise. In centers with expertise in endoscopic GBD, the techniques are preferred over PT-GBD with improved outcomes. (Clinical trial registration number: CRD42020181972.)

      Graphical abstract

      Abbreviations:

      ETP-GBD (endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage), EUS-GBD (EUS-guided gallbladder drainage), PT-GBD (percutaneous cholecystostomy), RR (relative risk)
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • NIH Consensus Conference
        Gallstones and laparoscopic cholecystectomy.
        JAMA. 1993; 269: 1018-1024
        • Mori Y.
        • Itoi T.
        • Baron T.H.
        • et al.
        Tokyo guidelines 2018: management strategies for gallbladder drainage in patients with acute cholecystitis (with videos).
        J Hepatobil Pancreat Sci. 2018; 25: 87-95
        • Siddiqui A.
        • Kunda R.
        • Tyberg A.
        • et al.
        Three-way comparative study of endoscopic ultrasound-guided transmural gallbladder drainage using lumen-apposing metal stents versus endoscopic transpapillary drainage versus percutaneous cholecystostomy for gallbladder drainage in high-risk surgical patients with acute cholecystitis: clinical outcomes and success in an international, multicenter study.
        Surg Endosc. 2019; 33: 1260-1270
        • Mohan B.P.
        • Khan S.R.
        • Trakroo S.
        • et al.
        Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage, transpapillary drainage, or percutaneous drainage in high risk acute cholecystitis patients: a systematic review and comparative meta-analysis.
        Endoscopy. 2020; 52: 96-106
        • Hutton B.
        • Salanti G.
        • Caldwell D.
        • et al.
        The PRISMA extension statement for reporting of systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses of health care interventions: checklist and explanations.
        Ann Intern Med. 2015; 162: 777-784
        • Cumpston M.
        • Li T.
        • Page M.J.
        • et al.
        Updated guidance for trusted systematic reviews: a new edition of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.
        Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019; 10: ED000142
        • Guyatt G.H.
        • Oxman A.D.
        • Montori V.
        • et al.
        GRADE guidelines: 5. Rating the quality of evidence—publication bias.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 2011; 64: 1277-1282
        • Guyatt G.H.
        • Oxman A.D.
        • Kunz R.
        • et al.
        GRADE guidelines 6. Rating the quality of evidence—imprecision.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 2011; 64: 1283-1293
        • Guyatt G.H.
        • Oxman A.D.
        • Kunz R.
        • et al.
        GRADE guidelines: 7. Rating the quality of evidence—inconsistency.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 2011; 64: 1294-1302
        • Guyatt G.H.
        • Oxman A.D.
        • Kunz R.
        • et al.
        GRADE guidelines: 8. Rating the quality of evidence—indirectness.
        J Clin Epidemiol. 2011; 64: 1303-1310
      1. Dias S, Welton NJ, Sutton AJ, et al. NICE DSU Technical Support Document 2: A generalised linear modelling framework for pairwise and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials [Internet]. London: National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK310366/. Accessed October 26, 2020.

        • Jang J.W.
        • Lee S.S.
        • Song T.J.
        • et al.
        Endoscopic ultrasound-guided transmural and percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage are comparable for acute cholecystitis.
        Gastroenterology. 2012; 142: 805-811
        • Teoh A.Y.B.
        • Kitano M.
        • Itoi T.
        • et al.
        Endosonography-guided gallbladder drainage versus percutaneous cholecystostomy in very high-risk surgical patients with acute cholecystitis: an international randomised multicentre controlled superiority trial (DRAC 1).
        Gut. 2020; 69: 1085-1091
        • Choi J.H.
        • Kim H.W.
        • Lee J.C.
        • et al.
        Percutaneous transhepatic versus EUS-guided gallbladder drainage for malignant cystic duct obstruction.
        Gastrointest Endosc. 2017; 85: 357-364
        • Higa J.T.
        • Sahar N.
        • Kozarek R.A.
        • et al.
        EUS-guided gallbladder drainage with a lumen-apposing metal stent versus endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage for the treatment of acute cholecystitis (with videos).
        Gastrointest Endosc. 2019; 90: 483-492
        • Irani S.
        • Ngamruengphong S.
        • Teoh A.
        • et al.
        similar efficacies of endoscopic ultrasound gallbladder drainage with a lumen-apposing metal stent versus percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage for acute cholecystitis.
        Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2017; 15: 738-745
        • Oh D.
        • Song T.J.
        • Cho D.H.
        • et al.
        EUS-guided cholecystostomy versus endoscopic transpapillary cholecystostomy for acute cholecystitis in high-risk surgical patients.
        Gastrointest Endosc. 2019; 89: 289-298
        • Iino C.
        • Shimoyama T.
        • Igarashi T.
        • et al.
        Comparable efficacy of endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage and percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage in acute cholecystitis.
        Endosc Int Open. 2018; 6: E594-E601
        • Teoh A.Y.B.
        • Serna C.
        • Penas I.
        • et al.
        Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage reduces adverse events compared with percutaneous cholecystostomy in patients who are unfit for cholecystectomy.
        Endoscopy. 2017; 49: 130-138
        • Tyberg A.
        • Saumoy M.
        • Sequeiros E.V.
        • et al.
        EUS-guided versus percutaneous gallbladder drainage: Isn't it time to convert?.
        J Clin Gastroenterol. 2018; 52: 79-84
        • Krishnamoorthi R.
        • Jayaraj M.
        • Thoguluva Chandrasekar V.
        • et al.
        EUS-guided versus endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage in high-risk surgical patients with acute cholecystitis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
        Surg Endosc. 2020; 34: 1904-1913

      Linked Article

      • Time to face the facts: EUS gallbladder drainage is here to stay
        Gastrointestinal EndoscopyVol. 93Issue 4
        • Preview
          EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) has been increasingly recognized as an effective treatment option for patients with acute cholecystitis who cannot undergo surgical cholecystectomy, alongside the historically traditional therapeutic options of percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage (PT-GBD) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography with transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETP-GBD).1,2 All 3 procedures have been shown to be both efficacious and safe for gallbladder drainage in nonsurgical patients.
        • Full-Text
        • PDF