Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Not yet recruiting

NCT Number: NCT07792486

Percutaneous Drainage Versus EUS-guided Gallbladder Drainage in Poor Surgical Patients With Cholecystitis

The goal of this clinical trial is to learn if endoscopic ultrasound-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) works better than percutaneous gallbladder drainage (PT-GBD) for people with acute cholecystitis (inflammation of the gallbladder) who cannot undergo immediate surgery.

The main questions this study aims to answer are:

* Does EUS-GBD lead to fewer serious medical problems and fewer additional procedures within 30 days after treatment? * Does EUS-GBD improve quality of life compared with PT-GBD?

Researchers will compare two methods of draining the gallbladder to see which treatment leads to better outcomes.

Participants will:

* Be randomly assigned to receive either EUS-GBD or PT-GBD. * Receive gallbladder drainage performed by experienced specialists. * Complete questionnaires about their health and quality of life before treatment and during follow-up. * Have follow-up visits or telephone consultations at 7, 30, 182, and 365 days after the drainage procedure.

The study will include participants from hospitals in several (European) countries.

Not yet recruiting

Trial opening soon.

Get Notified

Key information

Conditions

Cholecystitis, Acute Biliary Tract Diseases Cholecystitis Digestive System Diseases Gallbladder Diseases

Age range

18 year and older

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Amsterdam UMC, location VUmc

Amsterdam, De Boelelaan 1118, 1081 HV, Netherlands

Location contact

Willemijn JC van Dijk, MD

CONTACT

[email protected]

+31630572840

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • ≥ 18 years
  • Definite diagnosis of acute cholecystitis following the Tokyo guidelines
  • Poor surgical patients, not eligible for acute cholecystectomy according to their surgeon, with indication for gallbladder drainage.b The reason for ineligibility is recorded.
  • Possibility to obtain written informed consent from the patient or their legal representative.
  • Drainage with both modalities is technically feasible (i.e. the gallbladder can be accessed with both techniques), as assessed by the treating physician and/or expert panel.

Exclusion criteria

  • Presence of a non-sealed perforated gallbladder. In case of a sealed perforation, patients can be included after assessment of an expert panel.
  • Need of dual treatment with both modalities, already established beforehand.
  • Prior gallbladder drainage attempts.
  • Surgically altered anatomy (i.e. alterations to the oesophagus, stomach and duodenum).
  • The presence of contraindications to either drainage modality, unless it is a temporary problem that can be mitigated beforehand (i.e. ascites drainage prior to percutaneous drainage).
  • Permanently incapacitated and therefore inability to fill out the quality of life surveys.

Treatment and study plan

Endoscopic ultrasound guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) with lumen apposing metal stents (LAMS)

Procedure

Endoscopic ultrasound guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) via transduodenal route and with the direct technique using a cautery-enhanced LAMS with co-axial 7Fr 3-7 cm pigtail stent through the LAMS, and linear echo-endoscope.

  • Absent gallbladder stones or stones <10mm: 10x10 mm stent
  • Present gallbladder stones: 15x10 mm stent

Percutaneous Gallbladder Drainage

Procedure

Percutaneous gallbladder drainage with Seldinger preferred technique using snographic and fluoroscopic guidance or cross-sectional imaging as needed. Preferred route is at the discretion of the interventional radiologist, as multiple recent studies have shown that transhepatic and transperitoneal approaches have similar outcomes. A needle according to physician preference may be used, with compatible guidewire, 8.5-10Fr pigtail catheter placed via an inter or subcostal approach.

Primary outcomes

  1. Ideal 30-day outcome

    Time frame: 30 days after index drainage procedure

    The primary outcome is the ideal 30-day outcome, consisting of the absence of severe adverse events (AGREE grade ≥ II) and non-elective reinterventions for drainage or pancreato-biliary events.

  2. Health-related quality of life measured by the EQ-5D-5L

    Time frame: At day 7 and 30 after index intervention

    Health-related quality of life assessed using the EQ-5D-5L. The descriptive system comprises five dimensions (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression), each with five response levels. Responses are converted to a single index value using a country-specific value set. Index values are anchored at 1 (full health) and 0 (a state equivalent to death), with negative values possible for states considered worse than death; higher index values indicate better health-related quality of life. Assessments at day 7 and day 30 will be combined into a single cumulative value; the exact value set and method of aggregation will be prespecified in the Statistical Analysis Plan.

  3. Quality of Life at day 7 and 30

    Time frame: At day 7 and 30 after index intervention

    Health-related quality of life assessed using the PROMIS Global-10 (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Global Health short form). Raw scores are converted to T-scores standardised to a mean of 50 and a standard deviation of 10 in the reference population; higher scores indicate better global physical and mental health. Assessments at day 7 and day 30 will be combined into a single cumulative value; the exact scoring and method of aggregation will be prespecified in the Statistical Analysis Plan.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Individual components of the ideal 30-day outcome

    Time frame: 30 days after drainage procedure

    Individual components of the primary outcome, including severe adverse events (AGREE grade ≥ II), all-cause mortality, and non-elective reinterventions for gallbladder drainage or pancreato-biliary events.

  2. Technical and clinical success of gallbladder drainage

    Time frame: During the index procedure and within 48 hours after drainage

    Technical success is defined as successful placement of the percutaneous drain or endoscopic stent during the index drainage procedure. Clinical success is defined as resolution of fever and improvement of symptoms related to acute cholecystitis. Resolution of fever is defined as body temperature below 38.0°C within 48 hours after the procedure.

  3. Adverse events after gallbladder drainage

    Time frame: 6 and 12 months after the drainage procedure

    Occurrence of adverse events after gallbladder drainage graded according to the AGREE (Adverse events in GastRointEstinal Endoscopy) classification (Grade I-V).

  4. Number of reinterventions after gallbladder drainage

    Time frame: 12 months after the drainage procedure

    Number of endoscopic, radiological, or surgical reinterventions related to the previous gallbladder drainage procedure.

  5. Length of intensive care unit and hospital stay

    Time frame: From diagnosis until 12 months follow-up

    Duration of intensive care unit (ICU) stay and total hospital stay in days, related and unrelated to cholecystitis.

  6. Recurrent (pancreato-)biliary events

    Time frame: 12 months after the drainage procedure

    Number of recurrent (pancreato-)biliary events

  7. Mortality

    Time frame: 12 months after the drainage procedure

    All-cause mortality and mortality related to the drainage procedure or biliary events will be recorded.

  8. 30 post-operative adverse events after interval cholecystectomy graded by AGREE classification

    Time frame: 30 days after interval cholecystectomy

    Proportion of patients undergoing interval cholecystectomy who experience one or more postoperative adverse events within 30 days after surgery, classified according to the AGREE (Adverse events in GastRointEstinal Endoscopy) classification (Grade I-V).

Study contacts

Contact information is provided by the study sponsor or research team.

Willemijn JC van Dijk, MD

CONTACT

[email protected]

+31630572840

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Academisch Medisch Centrum - Universiteit van Amsterdam (AMC-UvA)

Other

Registry information

Official study title

Percutaneous Drainage Versus EUS-guided Gallbladder Drainage in Poor Surgical Patients With Cholecystitis: a Multicenter International Randomized Controlled Superiority Trial

Acronym: EUSCAPE

Important dates

Study start
2026
Primary completion
2028
Study completion
2029
First posted
Aug 28, 2026
Registry last updated
Aug 28, 2026

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Related clinical trials

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.