Abstract
This study conducts a systematic review comparing open surgery and laparoscopic repair techniques for perforated peptic ulcer. The research was performed using PubMed and ScienceDirect databases, covering studies published in the last five years. Nine articles directly comparing the two surgical techniques were included, evaluating factors such as hospitalization time, postoperative complications, wound healing time, and infection rates. The results suggest that laparoscopic surgery offers several advantages, including reduced hospital stay and faster recovery, while open surgery remains relevant in specific cases. The analysis highlights the importance of selecting the surgical technique based on the patient's clinical condition and the surgeon's expertise, with laparoscopy emerging as the preferred approach in most cases. This study aims to provide evidence that can guide surgical practice, promoting better outcomes and a more patient-centered approach to the management of perforated peptic ulcers.
Submitted Version (
Free)
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call