BACKGROUND AND AIMS: EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) is a challenging technique for endoscopists that requires a high level of skill. EUS-GBD is challenging because the gallbladder can be easily collapsed. To resolve this issue, we aimed to develop a retrievable puncture anchor traction (RPAT) method for EUS-GBD. We evaluated and compared the success rate, safety, and outcomes of the RPAT method for EUS-GBD against EUS-GBD without RPAT using a porcine model. METHODS: In total, 16 Bama mini pigs (weighing 15-20 kg) were randomly divided into an experimental group (n = 8) and a control group (n = 8). The RPAT method was performed in the experimental group and EUS-GBD without retrievable puncture anchor was performed in the control group. Incidence of operative adverse events, wound healing, and success rates of EUS-GBD were compared and analyzed between the experimental group and the control group. RESULTS: All EUS-GBD procedures were successfully performed in all 8 animals in the experimental group (100%). However, in the control group, EUS-GBD was successfully performed only on 4 pigs (50%); the remaining 4 pigs died because of EUS-GBD failure caused by gallbladder collapse leading to unsuccessful frontal stent release. CONCLUSIONS: RPAT helped increase the success rate of EUS-GBD and could reduce gallbladder collapse. Therefore, we believe this method can be applied to EUS-GBD in the near future. Furthermore, RPAT will enhance the safety of EUS-GBD.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) is a challenging technique for endoscopists that requires a high level of skill. EUS-GBD is challenging because the gallbladder can be easily collapsed. To resolve this issue, we aimed to develop a retrievable puncture anchor traction (RPAT) method for EUS-GBD. We evaluated and compared the success rate, safety, and outcomes of the RPAT method for EUS-GBD against EUS-GBD without RPAT using a porcine model. METHODS: In total, 16 Bama mini pigs (weighing 15-20 kg) were randomly divided into an experimental group (n = 8) and a control group (n = 8). The RPAT method was performed in the experimental group and EUS-GBD without retrievable puncture anchor was performed in the control group. Incidence of operative adverse events, wound healing, and success rates of EUS-GBD were compared and analyzed between the experimental group and the control group. RESULTS: All EUS-GBD procedures were successfully performed in all 8 animals in the experimental group (100%). However, in the control group, EUS-GBD was successfully performed only on 4 pigs (50%); the remaining 4 pigs died because of EUS-GBD failure caused by gallbladder collapse leading to unsuccessful frontal stent release. CONCLUSIONS: RPAT helped increase the success rate of EUS-GBD and could reduce gallbladder collapse. Therefore, we believe this method can be applied to EUS-GBD in the near future. Furthermore, RPAT will enhance the safety of EUS-GBD.