Management of acute cholecystitis after biliary stenting for malignant obstruction: comparison of percutaneous gallbladder drainage and aspiration

  • Yugo ImaiEmail author
  • Takaaki Hasegawa
  • Yozo Sato
  • Hidekazu Yamaura
  • Shinichi Murata
  • Mina Kato
  • Kazuo Hara
  • Norihisa Nitta
  • Yoshitaka Inaba
Original Article



To evaluate and compare the clinical outcomes between percutaneous gallbladder drainage (PGBD) and percutaneous gallbladder aspiration (PGBA) for acute cholecystitis after biliary stenting for malignant biliary obstruction.

Materials and methods

Twenty-six and 14 patients underwent PGBD and PGBA, respectively, for acute cholecystitis after biliary stenting for malignant obstruction. The technical success rate, clinical effectiveness, and safety were compared between the 2 groups.


Technical success was achieved in all patients. Clinical effectiveness rate was significantly higher in the PGBD group than in the PGBA group [100% (26/26) vs. 57% (8/14), p < 0.01]. In the PGBA group, clinical effectiveness rate was significantly lower in patients with tumor involvement of the cystic duct [13% (1/8) with involvement vs. 83% (5/6) without involvement, p = 0.03]. There were no deaths related to the procedure or acute cholecystitis aggravation. Pleural effusion and biliary peritonitis occurred in 1 patient each after PGBD and intra-abdominal bleeding occurred in 1 patient after PGBA as complications requiring treatment.


Although PGBD was a more effective treatment for acute cholecystitis after biliary stenting for malignant obstruction, PGBA may be a less invasive option for high-risk patients without tumor involvement of the cystic duct.


Cholecystitis Biliary stenting Percutaneous gallbladder drainage Percutaneous gallbladder aspiration 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical statement

All procedures performed in the studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

This retrospective study was approved by our institutional review board and the necessity of informed consent for inclusion in this study was waived. Informed consent to perform PGBD or PGBA was obtained from all patients before the procedure.


  1. 1.
    Purkayastha S, Tilney HS, Georgiou P, Athanasiou T, Tekkis PP, Darzi AW. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy versus mini-laparotomy cholecystectomy: a meta-analysis of randomized control trials. Surg Endosc. 2007;21(8):1294–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Yokoe M, Hata J, Strasberg SM, Asbun HA, Wakabayashi G, Kozaka K, Guidelines Tokyo, et al. diagnostic and severity grading of acute cholecystitis (with videos). J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2018. Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tsutsui K, Uchida N, Hirabayashi S, Kamada H, Ono M, Ogawa M, et al. Usefulness of single and repetitive percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder aspiration for the treatment of acute cholecystitis. J Gastroenterol. 2007;42(7):583–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Houghton PW, Jenkinson LR, Donaldson LA. Cholecystectomy in the elderly: a prospective study. Br J Surg. 1985;72(3):220–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Frazee RC, Nagorny DM, Mucha P Jr. Acute acalculous cholecystitis. Mayo Clin Proc. 1989;64(2):163–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chopra S, Dodd GD 3rd, Mumbower AL, Chintapalli KN, Schwesinger KR, Dorman JP, et al. Treatment of acute cholecystitis in non-critically ill patients at high surgical risk: comparison of clinical outcomes after gallbladder aspiration and after percutaneous cholecystostomy. Am J Roentgenol. 2001;176(4):1025–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ito K, Fujita N, Noda Y, Kobayashi G, Kimura K, Sugawara T, et al. Percutaneous cholecystostomy versus gallbladder aspiration for acute cholecystitis: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Am J Roentogenol. 2004;183(1):193–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Tsuyuguchi T, Takada T, Kawaharada Y, Nimura Y, Wada K, Nagino M, et al. Techniques of biliary drainage for acute cholecystitis: Tokyo Guidelines. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg. 2007. Scholar
  9. 9.
    Komatsu S, Tsukamoto T, Iwasaki T, Toyokawa A, Hasegawa Y, Tsuchida S, et al. Role of percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder aspiration in the early management of acute cholecystitis. J Dig Dis. 2014. Scholar
  10. 10.
    Isayama H, Kawabe T, Nakai Y, Tsujino T, Sasahira N, Yamamoto N, et al. Cholecystitis after metallic stent placement in patients with malignant distal biliary obstruction. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2006;4(9):1148–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Smith AC, Dowsett JF, Russell RC, Hatfield AR, Cotton PB. Randomized trial of endoscopic stenting versus surgical bypass in malignant low bileduct obstruction. Lancet. 1994;344(8938):1655–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Andersen JR, Sørensen S, Kruse A, Rokkjaer M, Matzen P. Randomized trial of endoscopic endoprosthesis versus operative bypass in malignant obstructive jaundice. Gut. 1989;30(8):1132–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bezzi M, Zolovkins A, Cantisani V, Salvatori FM, Rossi M, Fanelli F, et al. New ePTFE/FEP-covered stent in the palliative treatment of malignant biliary obstruction. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2002;13(6):581–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Schöfl R, Brownstone E, Reichel W, Fount W, Samec HJ, et al. Malignant bile-duct obstruction: experience with self-expamding metal endoprostheses (Wallstents) in Austria. Endoscopy. 1994;26(7):592–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Suk KT, Kim HS, Kim JW, Baik SK, Kwon SO, Kim HG, et al. Risk factors for cholecystitis after metal stent placement in malignant biliary obstruction. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006;64(4):522–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Verbanck JJ, Demol JW, Ghillebert GL, Rutgeerts LJ, Surmont IP. Ultrasound-guided puncture of the gallbladder for acute cholecystitis. Lancet. 1993;341(8853):1132–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Tazawa J, Sanada K, Maekawa S, Sakai Y, Yamane M, Kusano F, et al. Gallbladder aspiration for acute cholecystitis in high-surgical-risk patients. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2003;18(4):463–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Seldinger SI. Catheter replacement of the needle in percutaneous arteriography; a new technique. Acta radiol. 1953;39(5):368–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.03 (CTCAE) 2010.
  20. 20.
    Rassameehiran S, Tantrachoti P, Nugent K. Percutaneous gallbladder aspiration for acute cholecystitis. Bayl Univ Med Cent Proc. 2016;29(4):381–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Borzellino G, de Manzoni G, Ricci F, Castaldini G, Guglielmi A, Cordiano C. Emergency cholecystectomy and subsequent cholecystectomy fir acute gallstone cholecystitis in the elderly. Br J Surg. 1999;86(12):1521–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Han IW, Jang JY, Kang MJ, Lee KB, Kim SW. Early versus delayed laparoscopic cholecystectomy after percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci. 2012. Scholar
  23. 23.
    Choi JH, Kim HW, Lee JC, et al. Percutaneous transhepatic versus EUS-guided gallbladder drainage for malignant cystic duct obstruction. Gastrointest Endosc. 2017;85(2):357–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Japan Radiological Society 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yugo Imai
    • 1
    Email author
  • Takaaki Hasegawa
    • 1
  • Yozo Sato
    • 1
  • Hidekazu Yamaura
    • 1
  • Shinichi Murata
    • 1
  • Mina Kato
    • 1
  • Kazuo Hara
    • 2
  • Norihisa Nitta
    • 3
  • Yoshitaka Inaba
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Diagnostic and Interventional RadiologyAichi Cancer Center HospitalNagoyaJapan
  2. 2.Department of GastroenterologyAichi Cancer Center HospitalNagoyaJapan
  3. 3.Departments of RadiologyShiga University of Medical ScienceOtsuJapan

Personalised recommendations