Benefits of endoscopic gallbladder stenting following percutaneous transhepatic gallbladder drainage

Table 1 Patient characteristics, n (%)

Characteristics	n = 35
Age, years, median (range)	75 (49-90)
Sex, male	30 (85.7)
Severity of cholecystitis
Mild	2 (5.7)
Moderate	27 (77.1)
Severe	6 (17.1)
Cystic duct diameter, mm, median (range)	3 (2-5.5)
Stone impaction in the cystic duct	8 (22.9)
CBD diameter, mm, median (range)	7 (4-13)
Presence of a CBD stone	11 (31.4)

CBD: Common bile duct.

Table 2 Endoscopic procedure, n (%)

Characteristics	n = 35
Technical success	27 (77.1)
Contrast cystic duct via cholangiogram	21 (60)
Final contrast cystic duct	34 (97.1)
Procedure time, mm, median (range)	24 (8-53)
Early adverse events	4 (11.4)
Pancreatitis	3 (8.6)
Cholangitis	1 (2.9)
Cystic duct perforation	0
Bleeding	0

Table 3 Late adverse events, n (%)

Characteristics	n = 27
Late adverse events
Cholecystitis	1 (3.7)
Cholangitis	0
Median follow-up period, days, median (range)	123 (20-1435)

Table 4 Characteristics of failed procedures

Age, year/sex	Type of cholecystitis	Severity grade	Presence of a CBD stone	Contrast cystic duct	Cystic diameter, mm	CBD diameter, mm	Cause of failed procedure	Adverse events
31/M	Calculous	Moderate	Yes	Yes	3.5	9	Failure of catheter insertion due to stone impaction	No
40/M	Calculous	Moderate	Yes	Yes	3.5	9	Failure of wire insertion	No
41/M	Calculous	Moderate	No	Yes	3	8.5	Failure of wire insertion	No
56/M	Calculous	Moderate	No	Yes	2.5	9	Failure of wire insertion	No
57/M	Calculous	Moderate	Yes	Yes	2.5	4	Failure of wire insertion	No
70/F	Calculous	Mild	No	Yes	3	12	Failure of wire insertion	No
71/F	Calculous	Moderate	Yes	Yes	3.5	9	Failure of catheter insertion due to stone impaction	No
89/M	Calculous	Moderate	Yes	Yes	4	12	Failure of wire insertion due to stone impaction	No

CBD: Common bile duct; M: Male; F: Female.