ArticleSurgical endoscopy2026
Elective endoscopic treatment of benign gallbladder diseases in high-surgical risk patients: a retrospective study.
Article in Surgical endoscopy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsEUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) has proved to be highly safe and effective in patients with acute cholecystitis at high surgical risk. These findings stimulated the search for populations outside the acute setting, where EUS-GBD performed electively could become a valid therapeutic option.
methodsThis is a retrospective, multicenter, study involving patients who underwent elective endoscopic gallbladder treatment (EEGBT) in nine referral centers. All patients had a benign gallbladder disease and were judged to be at high surgical risk, with an indication to undergo cholecystectomy. EUS-GBD was performed using LAMSs and followed by intra-gallbladder lithotripsy when necessary. Primary outcome was adverse events (AE) rate; secondary outcomes included technical and clinical success rates and need for additional intracholecystic procedures.
resultsForty-nine patients (mean age 78.7 ± 12.3 years, M/F 22/27) underwent EEGBT over a 2-year period. All patients had ASA score ≥ 3, and a Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥ 5 was present in 71% of them. The most frequent indication was recurrent mild acute cholecystitis (42.9%). Technical success was achieved in all patients, with LAMS implantation more frequently performed from the duodenum (67.3%). AEs occurred in 3/49 (6.1%) and included 2 cases of stent occlusion-related cholecystitis, and one case of cholangitis all successfully treated endoscopically. One patient was lost at follow-up after the procedure. Intracholecystic lithotripsy was required in 12.5% of patients (6/48). Clinical success was obtained in 100% of cases. There were no EEGBT-related deaths.
conclusionEEGBT has high technical and clinical success rates, with an acceptable safety profile. Prospective studies to standardize procedural aspects and develop dedicated accessories for this procedure are needed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42484685What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.