Markus Zimmermann1, Martin Hoffmann2, Tilman Laubert3, Carlo Jung4, Hans-Peter Bruch5, Erik Schloericke6. 1. Department of Surgery, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23538, Lübeck, Germany. mark.zimmer@gmx.de. 2. Department of Surgery, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23538, Lübeck, Germany. drmartinhoffmann@yahoo.de. 3. Department of Surgery, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23538, Lübeck, Germany. tlaubert@googlemail.com. 4. Department of Surgery, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23538, Lübeck, Germany. carlo.jung@gmx.de. 5. Department of Surgery, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23538, Lübeck, Germany. bruch@bdc.de. 6. Westküstenklinikum, Heide Esmarchstraße 50, 25746, Heide, Germany. e.schloericke@gmx.de.
Abstract
PURPOSE: A perforated peptic ulcer can be managed laparoscopically in selected patients. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether conversion of emergency laparoscopy is inferior to primary median laparotomy in terms of postoperative morbidity and mortality. METHODS: We analyzed patients who underwent laparoscopic or open surgery for a perforated peptic ulcer at the Department of Surgery, University of Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Luebeck between January, 1996 and December, 2010. Perforations were graded according to the Boey classification, a preoperative risk-scoring system. RESULTS: Conversion to laparotomy was necessary in 20 of the 45 patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery (CG); therefore, laparoscopic operations were completed in 25 patients (LG). The third patient cohort comprised 139 patients who underwent primary laparotomy (OG). Overall minor morbidity was significantly lower (p = 0.048) in the LG patients than in the OG patients, whereas no significant differences were found in major morbidity and mortality, particularly between the OG and CG. CONCLUSION: Patients' suitability for laparoscopic management should be decided on according to Boey's clinical scoring system. Our findings demonstrated that conversion from laparoscopy to laparotomy was not associated with elevated postoperative morbidity or mortality versus initial laparotomy. Therefore, emergency operations may be commenced laparoscopically in selected patients, especially considering the postoperative advantages of this approach.
PURPOSE: A perforated peptic ulcer can be managed laparoscopically in selected patients. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether conversion of emergency laparoscopy is inferior to primary median laparotomy in terms of postoperative morbidity and mortality. METHODS: We analyzed patients who underwent laparoscopic or open surgery for a perforated peptic ulcer at the Department of Surgery, University of Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Luebeck between January, 1996 and December, 2010. Perforations were graded according to the Boey classification, a preoperative risk-scoring system. RESULTS: Conversion to laparotomy was necessary in 20 of the 45 patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery (CG); therefore, laparoscopic operations were completed in 25 patients (LG). The third patient cohort comprised 139 patients who underwent primary laparotomy (OG). Overall minor morbidity was significantly lower (p = 0.048) in the LG patients than in the OG patients, whereas no significant differences were found in major morbidity and mortality, particularly between the OG and CG. CONCLUSION:Patients' suitability for laparoscopic management should be decided on according to Boey's clinical scoring system. Our findings demonstrated that conversion from laparoscopy to laparotomy was not associated with elevated postoperative morbidity or mortality versus initial laparotomy. Therefore, emergency operations may be commenced laparoscopically in selected patients, especially considering the postoperative advantages of this approach.
Authors: C Bloechle; A Emmermann; T Strate; U J Scheurlen; C Schneider; E Achilles; M Wolf; D Mack; C Zornig; C E Broelsch Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 1998-03 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: Mark Buunen; Ruben Veldkamp; Wim C J Hop; Esther Kuhry; Johannes Jeekel; Eva Haglind; Lars Påhlman; Miguel A Cuesta; Simon Msika; Mario Morino; Antonio Lacy; Hendrik J Bonjer Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2008-12-13 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Markus K Muller; Simon Wrann; Jeannette Widmer; Jennifer Klasen; Markus Weber; Dieter Hahnloser Journal: World J Surg Date: 2016-09 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: André Pereira; Hugo Santos Sousa; Diana Gonçalves; Eduardo Lima da Costa; André Costa Pinho; Elisabete Barbosa; José Barbosa Journal: Minim Invasive Surg Date: 2021-05-12