Comparison of trans-gastric vs trans-enteric (trans-duodenal or trans-jejunal) endoscopic ultrasound guided gallbladder drainage using lumen apposing metal stents

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasound guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) is being increasingly used in practice (either as a bridge to cholecystectomy in high-risk patients or as destination therapy in non-surgical patients). Stents are used to create a conduit between the lumen of the gallbladder (GB) and the intestinal lumen through the gastric or enteric routes. Among the various types of stents used, cautery-enhanced lumen apposing metallic stents (LAMS) may be associated with fewer adverse events (AEs). AIM: To compare the clinical success, technical success, and rate of AEs between transgastric (TG) and trans-enteric [transduodenal (TD)/transjejunal (TJ)] approach to GB drainage. Further, we analyzed whether using cautery enhanced stents during EUS-GBD impacts the above parameters. METHODS: Study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022319019) and comprehensive literature review was conducted. Manuscripts were reviewed for the data collection: Rate of AEs, clinical success, and technical success. Random effects model was utilized for the analysis. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference in clinical and technical success between the TD/TJ and TG approaches (P > 0.05) were noted. There was no statistically significant difference in the rate of AEs when comparing two-arm studies only. However, when all studies were included in the analysis difference was almost significant favoring the TD/TJ approach. When comparing cautery-enhanced LAMS with non-cautery enhanced LAMS, a statistically significant difference in the rate of AEs was observed when all the studies were included, with the rate being higher in non-cautery enhanced stents (14.0% vs 37.8%; P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: As per our study results, TD/TJ approach appears to be associated with lower rate of adverse events and comparable efficacy when compared to the TG approach for the EUS-GBD. Additionally, use of cautery-enhanced LAMS for EUS-GBD is associated with a more favorable adverse event profile compared to cold LAMS. Though the approach chosen depends on several patient and physician factors, the above findings could help in deciding the ideal drainage route when both TG and TD/TJ approaches are feasible.