Abstract
Background: Comparative study of laparoscopic and open surgical method in management of peptic ulcer perforation
 Methods: The present study was conducted in patients presented with perforation peritonitis to the emergency department in G.G.S medical college and hospital, a tertiary care hospital in Faridkot, Punjab in which comparison of the clinical outcome between laparoscopic and open surgical methods for treatment of Gastro duodenal perforation was study.
 Results: Mean operative time of laparoscopic repair group was higher (158.2±0.64 min) in comparison to open repair group (70.8±0.42 min). In the present study post-operative pain score was assessed in each and every patient using Visual analogue scale. On post-operative day 1, mean VAS for OR Group was significantly higher in comparison to LR Group. Later on postoperative day 3, Majority of patients of in LR group had a highest score of 1-4 while in OR group was score 5-7.Nexton postoperative day 5, again mean VAS for LR patients was less in comparison to OR Group.
 Conclusion: As this is the first kind of study in our geographical area in which role of alcohol proved to be an important risk factor. Laparoscopic approach for repair of perforated peptic ulcer may offer significant advantage over open repair approach with lesser post-operative pain, lsser postoperative complications like wound infections, comparable reperforation rates and
 lesser duration of hospital stay.
 Keywords: Laparoscopic, Open, Repair
Highlights
Since the eradication of Helicobacter pylori the incidence of peptic ulcer disease has decreased considerably and the definitive surgical procedures are rarely performed these days
Background: Comparative study of laparoscopic and open surgical method in management of peptic ulcer perforation Methods: The present study was conducted in patients presented with perforation peritonitis to the emergency department in G.G.S medical college and hospital, a tertiary care hospital in Faridkot, Punjab in which comparison of the clinical outcome between laparoscopic and open surgical methods for treatment of Gastro duodenal perforation was study
Later on postoperative day 3, Majority of patients of in LR group had a highest score of 1-4 while in OR group was score 5-7.Nexton postoperative day 5, again mean VAS for LR patients was less in comparison to OR Group
Summary
Since the eradication of Helicobacter pylori the incidence of peptic ulcer disease has decreased considerably and the definitive surgical procedures are rarely performed these days. Correspondingly the incidence of perforated peptic ulcer disease has not reduced significantly. The Helicobacter Pylori infection, smoking, fasting during Ramadan, use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and past history of peptic ulcer are all statistically significant contributing factor for perforation.[1] The perforated peptic ulcer disease is a surgical emergency and the conventional surgical management has been laparotomy with either simple closure or omentum patch. The surgical technique has not changed but the minimal access approach has been increasing used for the closure of perforated peptic ulcer. Since the first successful laparoscopic closure of a perforated peptic ulcer, several prospective and retrospective studies have shown better results compared to open approach.[2]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
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
