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.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

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.

METHODS

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.

RESULTS

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).

CONCLUSIONS

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.