Typhoid Ileal Perforation: Comparative Study of Ileostomy Versus Primary Repair and associated Morbidity and Mortality

Abstract

Objectives: To study the result of primary repair with ileostomy in cases of typhoid ileal perforation.
 Study Design: Quasi-experimental study.
 Place and Duration of Study: Department of Surgery, Jinnah Postgraduate Medical Center, Karachi Pakistan, from May 2019 to Jun 2020
 Methodology: Participants who were operated on for typhoid ileal perforation were included, while patients who presented with a hollow viscus perforation other than ileal perforation were excluded from the study. Peritoneal lavage and exploration were performed. All per-operative findings were documented. In addition, the socio-demographic and clinical parameters, including the postoperative complications and morbidity/mortality, were documented.
 Results: Out of the 73 individuals with ileal perforation included in this research, 52 underwent primary repair, whereas 21 underwent ileostomy. Patients who had undergone ileostomy had a higher morbidity (61.90%) and mortality (19.00%) rate than patients in the Primary Repair Group. In addition, patients in the ileostomy Group had significantly higher rates of wound dehiscence and infection, electrolyte imbalance, and weight loss than patients in the Primary Repair Group.
 Conclusion: The current study indicates that primary repair is an ideal procedure for typhoid ileal perforation compared to an ileostomy.