Literature DB >> 36192594

Laparoscopic versus open repair of perforated peptic ulcers: analysis of outcomes and identification of predictive factors of conversion.

Dario Tartaglia1, Silvia Strambi2, Federico Coccolini2, Alessio Mazzoni2, Mario Miccoli3, Camilla Cremonini2, Enrico Cicuttin2, Massimo Chiarugi2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The surgical treatment for perforated peptic ulcers (PPUs) can be safely performed laparoscopically. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of patients who received different surgical approaches for PPU and to identify the predictive factors for conversion to open surgery.
METHODS: This retrospective study analyzed patients treated for PPUs from 2002 to 2020. Three groups were identified: a complete laparoscopic surgery group (LG), a conversion to open group (CG), and a primary open group (OG). After univariate comparisons, a multivariate analysis was conducted to identify the predictive factors for conversion.
RESULTS: Of the 175 patients that underwent surgery for PPU, 104 (59.4%) received a laparoscopic-first approach, and 27 (25.9%) required a conversion to open surgery. Patients treated directly with an open approach were older (p < 0.0001), had more comorbidities (p < 0.0001), and more frequently had a previous laparotomy (p = 0.0001). In the OG group, in-hospital mortality and ICU need were significantly higher, while the postoperative stay was longer. Previous abdominal surgery (OR 0.086, 95% CI 0.012-0.626; p = 0.015), ulcer size (OR 0.045, 95% CI 0.010-0.210; p < 0.0001), and a posterior ulcer location (OR 0.015, 95% CI 0.001-0.400; p = 0.012) were predictive factors for conversion to an open approach.
CONCLUSION: This study confirms the benefits of the laparoscopic approach for the treatment of PPUs. Previous laparotomies, a greater ulcer size, and a posterior location of the ulcer are risk factors for conversion to open surgery during laparoscopic repair.
© 2022. The Author(s).

Entities:  

Keywords:  Conversion to open surgery; Duodenum; Laparoscopy; Perforated peptic ulcer; Stomach

Year:  2022        PMID: 36192594     DOI: 10.1007/s13304-022-01391-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Updates Surg        ISSN: 2038-131X


  26 in total

Review 1.  Preoperative prognostic factors for mortality in peptic ulcer perforation: a systematic review.

Authors:  Morten Hylander Møller; Sven Adamsen; Reimar Wernich Thomsen; Ann Merete Møller
Journal:  Scand J Gastroenterol       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 2.423

2.  Surgical delay is a critical determinant of survival in perforated peptic ulcer.

Authors:  D L Buck; M Vester-Andersen; M H Møller
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 6.939

3.  Meta-analysis of perioperative outcomes of acute laparoscopic versus open repair of perforated gastroduodenal ulcers.

Authors:  Roberto Cirocchi; Kjetil Soreide; Salomone Di Saverio; Elena Rossi; Alberto Arezzo; Mauro Zago; Iosief Abraha; Nereo Vettoretto; Massimo Chiarugi
Journal:  J Trauma Acute Care Surg       Date:  2018-08       Impact factor: 3.313

4.  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

Review 5.  Perforated peptic ulcer disease: a review of history and treatment.

Authors:  Mariëtta J O E Bertleff; Johan F Lange
Journal:  Dig Surg       Date:  2010-06-22       Impact factor: 2.588

6.  Laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  H Lau
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2004-05-12       Impact factor: 4.584

7.  Laparoscopic suture closure of perforated duodenal peptic ulcer.

Authors:  Jean-Pierre Arnaud; Jean-Jacques Tuech; Roberto Bergamaschi; Patrick Pessaux; Nicolas Regenet
Journal:  Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 1.719

8.  Surgical repair of perforated peptic ulcers: laparoscopic versus open approach.

Authors:  Victor Vakayil; Brent Bauman; Keaton Joppru; Reema Mallick; Christopher Tignanelli; John Connett; Sayeed Ikramuddin; James V Harmon
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2018-07-24       Impact factor: 4.584

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

10.  Perforated and bleeding peptic ulcer: WSES guidelines.

Authors:  Antonio Tarasconi; Federico Coccolini; Walter L Biffl; Matteo Tomasoni; Luca Ansaloni; Edoardo Picetti; Sarah Molfino; Vishal Shelat; Stefania Cimbanassi; Dieter G Weber; Fikri M Abu-Zidan; Fabio C Campanile; Salomone Di Saverio; Gian Luca Baiocchi; Claudio Casella; Michael D Kelly; Andrew W Kirkpatrick; Ari Leppaniemi; Ernest E Moore; Andrew Peitzman; Gustavo Pereira Fraga; Marco Ceresoli; Ronald V Maier; Imtaz Wani; Vittoria Pattonieri; Gennaro Perrone; George Velmahos; Michael Sugrue; Massimo Sartelli; Yoram Kluger; Fausto Catena
Journal:  World J Emerg Surg       Date:  2020-01-07       Impact factor: 5.469

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.