BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic surgery, a minimally invasive technique, has recently begun to be used on perforated peptic ulcers effectively and frequently. Nevertheless, most studies have shown that the disadvantages of the laparoscopic treatment of peptic ulcers are a long operation time, a high reoperation rate, and a need for an experienced surgeon. Thus, the objective of the current study was to compare the safety and efficacy of optimized laparoscopic surgery without an omental patch for a perforated peptic ulcer within a shorter operational time with conventional open surgery in a 4-year period. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From May 2002 to June 2006, 35 consecutive patients with a clinical diagnosis of a perforated peptic ulcer were prepared prospectively to undergo either an open or optimized laparoscopic surgery. RESULTS: Seventeen patients with a perforated peptic ulcer underwent simple laparoscopic repair without an omental patch. Three patients (17.6%) who were begun by the laparoscopic approach had to be converted to open surgery. Eighteen patients underwent conventional open surgery. The mean operative time for laparoscopic repair was 42.10 minutes (range, 35-60), which was significantly shorter than the 55.83 minutes for open repair (range, 35-72; P = 0.001). Postoperative parenteral analgesic requirements were lower after laparoscopic repair (75.0 mg) than that after an open repair procedure (101.39 mg; P = 0.02). There was no statistically significant difference between the procedures in terms of hospital stay (5 vs. 5.33 days; P = 0.37) and the timing of access to normal daily activity (6.8 vs. 7.1 days) (P = 0.54). CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic surgery, when optimized by a simple repair without an omental patch and 10 mm of a large-channel aspirator-irrigator, may be safely and effectively applied to the patients with small duodenal perforated peptic ulcers (<10 mm) and because of its having low risk factors. The procedure may be an alternative treatment to other procedures when in experienced hands.
BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic surgery, a minimally invasive technique, has recently begun to be used on perforated peptic ulcers effectively and frequently. Nevertheless, most studies have shown that the disadvantages of the laparoscopic treatment of peptic ulcers are a long operation time, a high reoperation rate, and a need for an experienced surgeon. Thus, the objective of the current study was to compare the safety and efficacy of optimized laparoscopic surgery without an omental patch for a perforated peptic ulcer within a shorter operational time with conventional open surgery in a 4-year period. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From May 2002 to June 2006, 35 consecutive patients with a clinical diagnosis of a perforated peptic ulcer were prepared prospectively to undergo either an open or optimized laparoscopic surgery. RESULTS: Seventeen patients with a perforated peptic ulcer underwent simple laparoscopic repair without an omental patch. Three patients (17.6%) who were begun by the laparoscopic approach had to be converted to open surgery. Eighteen patients underwent conventional open surgery. The mean operative time for laparoscopic repair was 42.10 minutes (range, 35-60), which was significantly shorter than the 55.83 minutes for open repair (range, 35-72; P = 0.001). Postoperative parenteral analgesic requirements were lower after laparoscopic repair (75.0 mg) than that after an open repair procedure (101.39 mg; P = 0.02). There was no statistically significant difference between the procedures in terms of hospital stay (5 vs. 5.33 days; P = 0.37) and the timing of access to normal daily activity (6.8 vs. 7.1 days) (P = 0.54). CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic surgery, when optimized by a simple repair without an omental patch and 10 mm of a large-channel aspirator-irrigator, may be safely and effectively applied to the patients with small duodenal perforated peptic ulcers (<10 mm) and because of its having low risk factors. The procedure may be an alternative treatment to other procedures when in experienced hands.
Authors: Astrid Leusink; Sheraz R Markar; Tom Wiggins; Hugh Mackenzie; Omar Faiz; George B Hanna Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2018-07-19 Impact factor: 4.584