Literature DB >> 30027511

Laparoscopic surgery for perforated peptic ulcer: an English national population-based cohort study.

Astrid Leusink1, Sheraz R Markar1, Tom Wiggins1, Hugh Mackenzie1, Omar Faiz1,2, George B Hanna3,4.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Randomized controlled trials have shown that laparoscopic approach to surgery for perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) is associated with improved short-term outcomes; however, there is limited evidence concerning national practice. The aim of this investigation was to evaluate the effect of laparoscopic approach to PPU surgery upon mortality and morbidity in England.
METHODS: Patients with a primary diagnosis of PPU, admitted as an emergency to a hospital in England, and receiving surgical intervention, between 2005 and 2012 were identified from the Hospital Episode Statistics database. Outcomes analyzed included 30-day and 90-day mortality, 30-day complications, and length of hospital stay. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify patient, hospital, and treatment-related factors associated with use of laparoscopy and mortality.
RESULTS: The study included 13,022 patients who underwent emergency surgery for PPU in England over an 8-year period. From 2005 to 2012, the utilization of laparoscopic surgery for PPU increased from 0 to 13% and was more commonly used in high volume emergency centers. Laparoscopic surgery was associated with significant reductions in 30-day (7% vs. 15.7%; P < 0.001) and 90-day mortality (8.9% vs. 19.6%; P < 0.001), pneumonia (6% vs. 10.1%; P < 0.001), ischemic cardiac events (1% vs. 2.4%; P = 0.007), as well as length of hospital stay (median 5 vs. 7 days; P < 0.001). Factors associated with a reduced utilization of laparoscopic surgery included age ≥ 70 years (Odds ratio (OR) = 0.58 (95% CI) 0.49-0.68) and Charlson Comorbidity Index score ≥ 2 (OR = 0.73; 95% CI 0.57-0.94).
CONCLUSION: The rate of laparoscopic repair of PPU is increasing at a national level and more common in high volume emergency centers. It is associated with reduced rates of mortality; pneumonia and shorter length of hospital stay, highlighting the need for strategies to improve dissemination of laparoscopic techniques necessary for PPU repair.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Laparoscopy; Perforated peptic ulcer

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30027511     DOI: 10.1007/s00464-018-6058-7

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Endosc        ISSN: 0930-2794            Impact factor:   4.584


  18 in total

Review 1.  Trends in perforated peptic ulcer: incidence, etiology, treatment, and prognosis.

Authors:  C Svanes
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2000-03       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 2.  Laparoscopic versus open colorectal resection in the elderly population.

Authors:  Katherine Grailey; Sheraz R Markar; Alan Karthikesalingam; Rima Aboud; Paul Ziprin; Omar Faiz
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2012-06-30       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Laparoscopic treatment of perforated peptic ulcer.

Authors:  P Mouret; Y François; J Vignal; X Barth; R Lombard-Platet
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  1990-09       Impact factor: 6.939

4.  Laparoscopic repair for perforated peptic ulcer: a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Wing T Siu; Heng T Leong; Bonita K B Law; Chun H Chau; Anthony C N Li; Kai H Fung; Yuk P Tai; Michael K W Li
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 12.969

5.  Predicting mortality and morbidity of patients operated on for perforated peptic ulcers.

Authors:  F Y Lee; K L Leung; B S Lai; S S Ng; S Dexter; W Y Lau
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2001-01

6.  Laparoscopic vs open appendectomy in older patients.

Authors:  Eleanor Southgate; Nicola Vousden; Alan Karthikesalingam; Sheraz R Markar; Stephen Black; Ahsan Zaidi
Journal:  Arch Surg       Date:  2012-06

7.  National proficiency-gain curves for minimally invasive gastrointestinal cancer surgery.

Authors:  H Mackenzie; S R Markar; A Askari; M Ni; O Faiz; G B Hanna
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2015-11-18       Impact factor: 6.939

8.  Laparoscopic repair of peptic ulcer perforation without omental patch versus conventional open repair.

Authors:  Mustafa Ates; Sedat Sevil; Erhan Bakircioglu; Cemil Colak
Journal:  J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 1.878

Review 9.  Perforated peptic ulcer.

Authors:  Kjetil Søreide; Kenneth Thorsen; Ewen M Harrison; Juliane Bingener; Morten H Møller; Michael Ohene-Yeboah; Jon Arne Søreide
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2015-09-26       Impact factor: 79.321

Review 10.  Laparoscopic correction of perforated peptic ulcer: first choice? A review of literature.

Authors:  Mariëtta J O E Bertleff; Johan F Lange
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2009-12-24       Impact factor: 4.584

View more
  2 in total

1.  Assessment of PULP score in predicting 30-day perforated duodenal ulcer morbidity, and comparison of its performance with Boey and ASA, a retrospective study.

Authors:  Tamer Saafan; Walid El Ansari; Omer Al-Yahri; Ammar Eleter; Hisham Eljohary; Rashad Alfkey; Mustafa Hajjar; Ali Toffaha; Abdelrahman El Osta
Journal:  Ann Med Surg (Lond)       Date:  2019-05-10

2.  Potential use of peptic ulcer perforation (PULP) score as a conversion index of laparoscopic-perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) repair.

Authors:  Yu-Hao Wang; Yu-Tung Wu; Chih-Yuan Fu; Chien-Hung Liao; Chi-Tung Cheng; Chi-Hsun Hsieh
Journal:  Eur J Trauma Emerg Surg       Date:  2020-11-21       Impact factor: 3.693

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.