BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the possibility, safety and advantages of laparoscopic approach in the diagnosis and therapy of perforated peptic ulcer. METHODS: This is a retrospective study including 69 cases of gastroduodenal perforation initially treated laparoscopically. The safety (morbidity and mortality) was estimated according to the two mortality rates fixed for laparotomies, APACHE II and Mannheimer Peritonitis Index (MPI). Sixty-nine patients (average age: 52 years), 23% of whom being over 70 years old, suffering from gastroduodenal perforation, were initially treated with laparoscopy. RESULTS: The laparoscopic diagnosis was done in 91% of cases. When the perforation was localized, the laparoscopic treatment was possible in 94% of cases. In 93% of cases a simple closure of the ulcerated perforation was performed. The conversion ratio was of 16%. One-hundred minutes (55-180) was the average operating. The morbidity was of 13%. One septic shock was reported in a patient with general purulent peritonitis diagnosed with laparoscopy and, after having converted, it was treated with laparotomy. No malignant iperCO2 was relieved. The reported mortality was of 4.3%, the theoretical mortality estimated was of 6% (MPI) and of 14% (Score APACHE II). The 3 deceased (87, 87 and 93 years old) had ASA index superior to 3. The remarkable advantage of laparoscopic approach is, in addition to diagnostic contribution, the absence of wall complications when the operation is not converted. CONCLUSIONS: The laparoscopic approach is suggested in gastroduodenal perforation, since it allows an etiological diagnosis and a treatment without conversion in 84% of cases.
BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the possibility, safety and advantages of laparoscopic approach in the diagnosis and therapy of perforated peptic ulcer. METHODS: This is a retrospective study including 69 cases of gastroduodenal perforation initially treated laparoscopically. The safety (morbidity and mortality) was estimated according to the two mortality rates fixed for laparotomies, APACHE II and Mannheimer Peritonitis Index (MPI). Sixty-nine patients (average age: 52 years), 23% of whom being over 70 years old, suffering from gastroduodenal perforation, were initially treated with laparoscopy. RESULTS: The laparoscopic diagnosis was done in 91% of cases. When the perforation was localized, the laparoscopic treatment was possible in 94% of cases. In 93% of cases a simple closure of the ulcerated perforation was performed. The conversion ratio was of 16%. One-hundred minutes (55-180) was the average operating. The morbidity was of 13%. One septic shock was reported in a patient with general purulent peritonitis diagnosed with laparoscopy and, after having converted, it was treated with laparotomy. No malignant iperCO2 was relieved. The reported mortality was of 4.3%, the theoretical mortality estimated was of 6% (MPI) and of 14% (Score APACHE II). The 3 deceased (87, 87 and 93 years old) had ASA index superior to 3. The remarkable advantage of laparoscopic approach is, in addition to diagnostic contribution, the absence of wall complications when the operation is not converted. CONCLUSIONS: The laparoscopic approach is suggested in gastroduodenal perforation, since it allows an etiological diagnosis and a treatment without conversion in 84% of cases.