ABSTRACTS: INTERVENTIONAL ENDOSCOPY
S1105 Practice Patterns of Endoscopists Performing Endoscopic Gallbladder Drainage McDonald, Nicholas MD1 ; Bilal, Mohammad MD2 ; Azeem, Nabeel MD3 ; Amateau, Stuart K. MD, PhD3
1 University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN;
2 University of Minnesota, Minneapolis VA Medical Center, Minneapolis, MN;
3 University of Minnesota Medical Center, Minneapolis, MN.
Introduction:
Over the last decade, techniques of endoscopic gallbladder drainage (EGBD) have been employed for temporary or definitive gallbladder drainage in patients with acute cholecystitis who are not surgical candidates. Despite growing interest and clinical use of EGBD, little is known about technical aspects of practice patterns of EGBD. Our aim was to survey endoscopists to evaluate the practice patterns and technical considerations regarding endoscopic gallbladder drainage.
Methods:
An 18-item survey was designed to evaluate the practice patterns of advanced endoscopists with regards to endoscopic gallbladder drainage. The survey was structured into the following domains: i) Experience and practice setting of endoscopists, ii) Preference and volumes of endoscopic drainage, iii) Practice patterns with respect to technical aspects of endoscopic gallbladder drainage. The survey was distributed to all members of the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE). Each response was included in the final analysis. Descriptive statistics were calculated using frequencies and percentages.
Results:
Responses were received from 217 endoscopists. Of these, 178 perform EUS-GBD and 178 perform ETGBD. The number of years since graduation of advanced endoscopy fellowship was: 0-5 years (39.6%), 6-10 years (16.5%), 11-15 years (10.4%) and more than 15 years (33.5%). The majority of respondents (75.4%) practice in a tertiary care setting. The preferred approach for endoscopic gallbladder drainage was EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) in 58.8%, ERCP-guided transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETGBD) 30.2%, and no preference in 11%. For EUS-GBD, 48% had no preference in anatomic site, 35.5% preferred transduodenal and 16.5% transgastric approaches. For EUS-GBD, 69.2% preferred placing lumen apposing metal stent (LAMS) without a guidewire. In terms of LAMS removal after EUS-GBD, 49.3% leave the LAMS indefinitely and 48.3% schedule routine removal of LAMS. For ETGBD via ERCP, the majority of respondents prefer 7 French (73.3%) and double pigtail (85.4%) stents. The most common follow-up plans after ETGBD were: never/as needed (36.7%) and every 3 months (29.5%). Further characteristics are summarized in Table.
Conclusion:
Despite growing interest in endoscopic gallbladder drainage, significant heterogeneity in practice patterns exists. Further study is needed to better understand these differences for further standardization of procedural techniques.
Preferred Approach for Endoscopic Drainage in Acute Cholecystitis
Endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage
107 (58.8%)
ERCP-guided transpapillary gallbladder stenting
55 (30.2%)
Other
20 (11%)
Preferred enteral access point for EUS GB drainage
Transgastric
25 (16.5%)
Transduodenal
54 (35.5%)
No preference
73 (48.0%)
Preferred Stent Type (EUS-GBD)
Lumen apposing metal stent
141 (100%)
Plastic stent
0
Use of guidewire (EUS-GBD)
Placed over a guidewire
43 (30.1%)
Placed without a guidewire
99 (69.2%)
Other
1 (0.7%)
Use of plastic stents within LAMS (EUS-GBD)
Yes
82 (57.3%)
No
59 (41.3%)
Other
2 (1.4%)
Preference regarding placement of number of plastic stents within LAMS (EUS-GBD)
One
74 (75.5%)
Two
23 (23.5%)
Three
0 (0%)
More than Three
1 (1.0%)
Case-by-case basis
0 (0%)
Removal of LAMS after EUS GB drainage
Leave indefinitely
67 (49.3%)
Schedule routine removal
69 (48.3%)
EUS-guided gallbladder drainage on patients who are currently on anticoagulation
Yes
30 (21.0%)
No
113 (79.0%)
Transpapillary gallbladder drainage (ETGBD)
Preferred Stent Diameter
7 French
85 (73.3%)
10 French
21 (18.1%)
Varies
0 (0%)
Other
10 (8.6%)
Preferred Stent Type
Single pigtail
7 (5.7%)
Double pigtail
105 (85.4%)
Straight stent
3 (2.4%)
No preference
8 (6.5%)
Number of stents typically placed
A single stent
119 (82.6%)
Multiple stents
21 (14.6%)
Varies case to case
0 (0%)
Other
4 (2.8%)
Follow up after stent placement
Every 3 months
41 (29.5%)
Every 6 months
14 (10.1%)
Never
51 (36.7%)
Other
33 (23.7%)
© 2022 by The American College of Gastroenterology View full article text