Literature DB >> 8881052

Comparison between laparoscopic and conventional omental patch repair for perforated duodenal ulcer.

J B Sø1, C K Kum, M L Fernandes, P Goh.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic omental patch repair.
METHOD: This is a retrospective review of 53 consecutive patients with omental patch repair for perforated duodenal ulcer; 38 underwent conventional open approach and 15 underwent laparoscopic patch repair. The only selection criterion was availability of expertise for laparoscopic repair on the day of admission. By chance, the open group had poorer ASA scores. There were four deaths and five postoperative complications in the open group.
RESULTS: Laparoscopic repair was successful in 14 cases with one postoperative complication. Operative time was longer in the laparoscopic group (80 vs 65 min in open group, p = 0.02). Patients required less postoperative analgesics in the laparoscopic group (median amount of pethidine was 75 mg vs 175 mg in the open group, p = 0.03). There was no statistically significant difference in terms of hospital stay and return to normal activities between the two procedures. Follow-up Visick scores were comparable in both groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic omental patch repair offers a safe alternative to the conventional method and causes less postoperative pain.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8881052     DOI: 10.1007/s004649900240

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


  24 in total

1.  Laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcers. The role of laparoscopy in generalised peritonitis.

Authors:  G S Robertson; S A Wemyss-Holden; G J Maddern
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 1.891

2.  Laparoscopic closure of perforated duodenal ulcer.

Authors:  M Khoursheed; M Fuad; H Safar; H Dashti; A Behbehani
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2000-01       Impact factor: 4.584

3.  Laparoscopic treatment of gastroduodenal perforations: comparison with conventional surgery.

Authors:  B Kirshtein; M Bayme; T Mayer; L Lantsberg; E Avinoach; S Mizrahi
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2005-09-27       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Laparoscopic repair of perforated duodenal ulcers: the"three-stitch" Graham patch technique.

Authors:  P W F Lam; M C S Lam; E K L Hui; Y W Sun; F P T Mok
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2005-10-24       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  The "stamp method": a new treatment for perforated peptic ulcer?

Authors:  M J O E Bertleff; R S B Liem; H L Bartels; P H Robinson; J F A Van der Werff; H J Bonjer; J F Lange
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2006-03-16       Impact factor: 4.584

6.  Risk factors influencing the early outcome results after laparoscopic repair of perforated duodenal ulcer and their predictive value.

Authors:  Raimundas Lunevicius; Matas Morkevicius
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2005-07-22       Impact factor: 3.445

7.  Feasibility of NOTES omental plug repair of perforated peptic ulcers: results from a clinical pilot trial.

Authors:  Juliane Bingener; Erica A Loomis; Christopher J Gostout; Martin D Zielinski; Navtej S Buttar; Louis M Wong Kee Song; Todd H Baron; Leili Shahgholi Ghahfarokhi; Elizabeth Rajan
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2013-01-26       Impact factor: 4.584

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

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

9.  Laparoscopic primary repair with omentopexy for duodenal ulcer perforation: a single institution experience of 21 cases.

Authors:  Chung Hyeun Ma; Min Gyu Kim
Journal:  J Gastric Cancer       Date:  2012-12-31       Impact factor: 3.720

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

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.