TY - JOUR
T1 - Endoscopic gallbladder drainage compared with percutaneous drainage
AU - Kedia, Prashant
AU - Sharaiha, Reem Z.
AU - Kumta, Nikhil A.
AU - Widmer, Jessica
AU - Jamal-Kabani, Armeen
AU - Weaver, Kristen
AU - Benvenuto, Andrea
AU - Millman, Jennifer
AU - Barve, Rahul
AU - Gaidhane, Monica
AU - Kahaleh, Michel
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2015 by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy.
PY - 2015/12/1
Y1 - 2015/12/1
N2 - Background High-risk patients with cholecystitis have conventionally been offered percutaneous gallbladder drainage (PGBD) for treatment. A growing experience of endoscopic gallbladder drainage (EGBD) has been reported to be effective and safe. Objective To compare the short- and long-term outcomes of EGBD and PGBD. Design A retrospective review. Setting Single academic tertiary care center. Patients Inpatients diagnosed with cholecystitis. Interventions Any patient deemed a nonsurgical candidate and who has undergone either PGBD or EGBD was included in the analysis. Main Outcome Measurements Patient demographics along with procedural and clinical outcomes were recorded for each group. Results Forty-three patients underwent PGBD and 30 underwent EGBD (24 transpapillary, 6 transmural). Technical (97.6% vs 100%) and clinical (97.6% vs 86.7%) success rates of PGBD and EGBD were similar. However, postprocedure hospital length of stay (16.3 vs 7.6 days), time to clinical resolution (4.6 vs 3.0 days), adverse event rate (39.5% vs 13.3%), number of sessions (2.0 vs 1.0), number of repeat interventions (53.4% vs 13.3%), and postprocedure pain scores (3.8 vs 2.1) were significantly higher for PGBD than EGBD. Limitations Retrospective analysis. Conclusion Although EGBD has similar technical and clinical success compared with PGBD, it uses fewer hospital resources and results in fewer adverse events, improved pain scores, and decreased need for repeat gallbladder drainage. EGBD may provide a less-invasive, safer, cost-effective option for gallbladder drainage than PGBD with improved clinical outcomes.
AB - Background High-risk patients with cholecystitis have conventionally been offered percutaneous gallbladder drainage (PGBD) for treatment. A growing experience of endoscopic gallbladder drainage (EGBD) has been reported to be effective and safe. Objective To compare the short- and long-term outcomes of EGBD and PGBD. Design A retrospective review. Setting Single academic tertiary care center. Patients Inpatients diagnosed with cholecystitis. Interventions Any patient deemed a nonsurgical candidate and who has undergone either PGBD or EGBD was included in the analysis. Main Outcome Measurements Patient demographics along with procedural and clinical outcomes were recorded for each group. Results Forty-three patients underwent PGBD and 30 underwent EGBD (24 transpapillary, 6 transmural). Technical (97.6% vs 100%) and clinical (97.6% vs 86.7%) success rates of PGBD and EGBD were similar. However, postprocedure hospital length of stay (16.3 vs 7.6 days), time to clinical resolution (4.6 vs 3.0 days), adverse event rate (39.5% vs 13.3%), number of sessions (2.0 vs 1.0), number of repeat interventions (53.4% vs 13.3%), and postprocedure pain scores (3.8 vs 2.1) were significantly higher for PGBD than EGBD. Limitations Retrospective analysis. Conclusion Although EGBD has similar technical and clinical success compared with PGBD, it uses fewer hospital resources and results in fewer adverse events, improved pain scores, and decreased need for repeat gallbladder drainage. EGBD may provide a less-invasive, safer, cost-effective option for gallbladder drainage than PGBD with improved clinical outcomes.
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/84952914642
U2 - 10.1016/j.gie.2015.03.1912
DO - 10.1016/j.gie.2015.03.1912
M3 - Article
C2 - 25952093
AN - SCOPUS:84952914642
SN - 0016-5107
VL - 82
SP - 1031
EP - 1036
JO - Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
JF - Gastrointestinal Endoscopy
IS - 6
ER -