Practice Patterns of Endoscopists Performing Endoscopic Gallbladder Drainage

IF 1.2 Q4 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY Techniques and Innovations in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1016/j.tige.2023.03.005
Nicholas M. McDonald , Mohammad Bilal , Nabeel Azeem, Stuart K. Amateau
{"title":"Practice Patterns of Endoscopists Performing Endoscopic Gallbladder Drainage","authors":"Nicholas M. McDonald ,&nbsp;Mohammad Bilal ,&nbsp;Nabeel Azeem,&nbsp;Stuart K. Amateau","doi":"10.1016/j.tige.2023.03.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background and Aims</h3><p><span><span>The standard of care for treatment of patients with </span>acute cholecystitis<span><span> is cholecystectomy. However, many patients are unfit for surgery due to substantial medical comorbidities, or surgery is technically challenging due to anatomic considerations. Options for patients who are not surgical candidates include percutaneous </span>cholecystostomy tube placement by </span></span>interventional radiology<span><span>, endoscopic gallbladder drainage (EGBD), or conservative management. Over the last decade, techniques of EGBD have been employed for temporary or definitive gallbladder drainage </span>in patients with acute cholecystitis who are not surgical candidates. Despite growing interest and clinical use of EGBD, little is known about practice patterns of EGBD. Our aim was to survey endoscopists to evaluate the practice patterns and technical considerations regarding EGBD.</span></p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>An 18-item survey was distributed to all members of the American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. Each response was included in the final analysis. Descriptive statistics were calculated using frequencies and percentages.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p><span>Responses were received from 217 endoscopists. Of these, 178 perform endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder draining and 178 perform endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage. The preferred approach for EGBD was endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage in 58.8%, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)-guided transpapillary gallbladder </span>stent placement in 30.2%, and no preference in 11%.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Despite growing interest in EGBD, significant heterogeneity in practice patterns exists. Further study is needed to better understand these differences and provide data for future guidelines.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":36169,"journal":{"name":"Techniques and Innovations in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Techniques and Innovations in Gastrointestinal Endoscopy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590030723000296","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background and Aims

The standard of care for treatment of patients with acute cholecystitis is cholecystectomy. However, many patients are unfit for surgery due to substantial medical comorbidities, or surgery is technically challenging due to anatomic considerations. Options for patients who are not surgical candidates include percutaneous cholecystostomy tube placement by interventional radiology, endoscopic gallbladder drainage (EGBD), or conservative management. Over the last decade, techniques of 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 practice patterns of EGBD. Our aim was to survey endoscopists to evaluate the practice patterns and technical considerations regarding EGBD.

Methods

An 18-item survey was distributed to all members of the American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. 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 endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder draining and 178 perform endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage. The preferred approach for EGBD was endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage in 58.8%, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP)-guided transpapillary gallbladder stent placement in 30.2%, and no preference in 11%.

Conclusion

Despite growing interest in EGBD, significant heterogeneity in practice patterns exists. Further study is needed to better understand these differences and provide data for future guidelines.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
内窥镜医师实施内窥镜胆囊引流的实践模式
背景与目的治疗急性胆囊炎的护理标准是胆囊切除术。然而,许多患者由于严重的医学合并症而不适合手术,或者由于解剖方面的考虑,手术在技术上具有挑战性。非手术候选人的选择包括通过介入放射学、内窥镜胆囊引流(EGBD)或保守治疗进行经皮胆囊造口管放置。在过去的十年里,EGBD技术已被用于非手术候选人的急性胆囊炎患者的临时或最终胆囊引流。尽管人们对EGBD越来越感兴趣并在临床上使用,但对EGBD的实践模式知之甚少。我们的目的是调查内镜医生,以评估EGBD的实践模式和技术考虑。方法将一项18项调查分发给美国胃肠道内镜学会的所有成员。每个回复都包含在最终分析中。使用频率和百分比计算描述性统计数据。结果共收到217名内镜医生的回复。其中178例采用内镜超声引导胆囊引流,178例采用经乳头胆囊引流。EGBD的首选方法是内镜超声引导下胆囊引流(58.8%),内镜逆行胰胆管造影(ERCP)引导下经乳头胆囊支架置入(30.2%),而非首选方法(11%)。结论尽管人们对EGBD越来越感兴趣,但实践模式存在显著的异质性。需要进一步的研究来更好地理解这些差异,并为未来的指导方针提供数据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
50.00%
发文量
60
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board Table of Contents Editorial Board Table of Contents Editorial Board
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1