Laparoscopic Repair Of Perforated Peptic Ulcer Research Articles

A simple and effective technique for laparoscopic gastrorrhaphy: modified Graham’s patch with barbed suture

IntroductionPeptic ulcers are caused by unbalanced acid production, and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in recent decades have helped to treat peptic ulcers effectively. Meanwhile, the incidence of perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) persists and has a high mortality rate if there is no adequate management. Primary closure with a modified Graham’s patch was well performed in early detected PPU with a small size < 2 cm. A laparoscopic approach for PPU was prescribed for decades with proven feasibility and safety. We introduced an effective technique combined with barbed suture and modified Graham’s patch, which can significantly reduce the surgical time without significantly increasing morbidity and mortality compared with traditional interrupted suture.Patients and methodWe retrospectively collected data from January 2014 to December 2020 in Keelung Change Gung Memorial Hospital, and a total of 154 patients receiving laparoscopic repair of PPU were included. There were 59 patients in the V-loc group (V group) and 95 patients in the laparoscopic primary repair group (P group).ResultsThe V group had a significantly shorter operation time than the P group (96.93 ± 22.14 min vs. 123.97 ± 42.14, P < 0.001). Ten patients suffered from morbidity greater than the Clavien‒Dindo classification 4 (5 from V group, and 5 from P group). Three patients with leakage were reported. Two patients were in the V group, and one patient was in the P group (p = 0.432).ConclusionLaparoscopic repair with barbed suture and modified Graham’s patch provides a simple and effective technique in the management of acute abdomen. This technique can be easily performed by experienced surgeons and trainees in minimally invasive surgery without affecting patient safety.

Surgical Management of Perforated Peptic Ulcer: A Comparative Meta-analysis of Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgery.

Despite the widescale success of proton pump inhibitors to reducing the incidence of peptic ulcer disease, perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) remains a significant cause of severe complications and death. The implementation of open or surgical repair of PPU should be guided by reliable guidelines which are based on current systematic evidence. To assess the comparative efficacy and safety of laparoscopic and open repair of PPU. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted based on retrospective, prospective cohort studies, and randomized clinical trials. Duration of surgery and postoperative complications and death were collected from eligible studies, and the outcomes were pooled using mean differences (MD) or relative risks (RRs) for numerical and binary outcomes, respectively. The estimated variance was expressed as 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). Forty-five studies were included (8456 patients, 56.08% underwent open repair, 6 prospective studies, 7 randomized clinical trials, and 32 retrospective studies). Compared with open repair, laparoscopic surgeries were associated with longer operative times (MD=8.36, 95% CI, 0.49-16.22), shorter hospital stay (MD=-2.74, 95% CI, -3.70 to-1.79), a higher risk of suture leakage (RR=1.91, 95% CI, 1.04-3.49) and lower risks of mortality (RR=0.57, 95% CI, 0.47-0.70), septic shock (RR=0.69, 95% CI, 0.49-0.98), renal failure (RR=0.38, 95% CI, 0.18-0.79), and wound infection (RR=0.26, 95% CI, 0.19-0.37). Laparoscopic repair of PPU showed promising safety outcomes; however, future well-designed randomized studies are warranted to reduce the observed performance bias and possible selection bias in individual studies.

Comparison of Omental Patch Closure Versus Simple Closure for Laparoscopic Repair of Perforated Peptic Ulcer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

To evaluate comparative outcomes of laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer with omental patch versus without omental patch. A systematic search of multiple electronic data sources was conducted, and all studies comparing laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) with and without omental patch were included. Operative time, postoperative complications, re-operation and mortality were the evaluated outcome parameters for the meta-analysis. Revman 5.3 was used for data analysis. Four observational studies reporting a total number of 438 patients who underwent laparoscopic repair of PPU with (n = 268) or without (n = 170) omental patch were included. Operative time was significantly shorter in no-omental patch group (NOP) when compared to omental patch group (P = .02). There was no significant difference in the risk of postoperative ileus (Odd ratio (OR) .76, P = .61), leakage (OR 1.17, P = .80), wound infection (OR 1.89, P = .34), intra-abdominal abscess (OR 1.17, P = .87), re-operation (OR .00, P = .94) and mortality (OR .55, P = .48). Moreover, length of hospital stay was comparable between the two groups (P = .81). Laparoscopic repair of PPU with or without omental patch have comparable postoperative complications and mortality rate. However, considering the shorter operative time, no-omental patch approach is an attractive and more favourable choice. Well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed to investigate this comparison.

Surgery for Perforated Peptic Ulcer: Is Laparoscopy a New Paradigm?

Introduction Laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) remains controversial mainly due to its safety and applicability in critically ill patients. The aim of this study is to compare the outcomes of laparoscopy versus laparotomy in the treatment of PPU. Methods Single-institutional, retrospective study of all patients submitted to surgical repair of PPU between 2012 and 2019. Results During the study period, 169 patients underwent emergent surgery for PPU. A laparoscopic approach was tried in 60 patients and completely performed in 49 of them (conversion rate 18.3%). The open group was composed of 120 patients (included 11 conversions). Comparing the laparoscopic with the open group, there were significant differences in gender (male/female ratio 7.2/1 versus 2.2/1, respectively; p=0.009) and in the presence of sepsis criteria (12.2% versus 38.3%, respectively; p=0.001), while the Boey score showed no differences between the two groups. The operative time was longer in the laparoscopic group (median 100' versus 80', p=0.01). Laparoscopy was associated with few early postoperative complications (18.4% versus 41.7%, p=0.004), mortality (2.0% versus 14.2%; p=0.02), shorter hospital stay (median 6 versus 7 days, p=0.001), and earlier oral intake (median 3 versus 4 days, p=0.021). Conclusion Laparoscopic repair of PPU may be considered the procedure of choice in patients without sepsis criteria if expertise and resources are available. This kind of approach is associated with a shorter length of hospital stay and earlier oral intake. In patients with sepsis criteria, more data are required to access the safety of laparoscopy in the treatment of PPU.

Open Versus Laparoscopic Repair of Perforated Peptic Ulcer Disease: A Propensity-matched Study of the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit.

The aim of this study was to compare open surgery (OS) with laparoscopic surgery (LS) for perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) disease using a National dataset. PPU disease is typically treated surgically with an omental patch. This can be performed through OS or a LS. Current evidence in OS versus LS suggests equivalence in mortality and postoperative complications, but a decrease in pain and wound infections with LS. A one-to-one propensity score-matched analysis of patients who underwent PPU repair from December 2013 to December 2017 using data from the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit was performed. Patients with an initially laparoscopic approach were classed as LS even if converted to OS. The primary end-point was 90-day mortality; secondary endpoints were length of stay (LOS), re-operation, and re-admission to critical care. Multivariable logistic and linear models were created to compare the effect of operative approach on binary and continuous outcomes with log-rank tests for time-to-event data. A total of 5253 patients underwent surgery in the study period. After propensity-matching, 2 groups of 1158 patients were created. Overall 90-day mortality was 7.5%. There was no difference between the LA and OA for 90-day mortality (7.2% vs 8.5%, OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.56- 1.15, P = 0.23), median LOS (equivalent at 7 days, P = 0.09), reoperation (3.6% vs 4.0%, P = 0.74), or re-admission to critical care (2.8% vs 2.9%, P = 0.92). Across the 4-year study period LS use increased from 20% to 26% and the conversion rate decreased from 40% to 31%. Short outcomes from laparoscopic PPU repair appear equivalent to open repair. There is increasing adoption of LS with decreasing conversion rates. LS for PPU appears to be an acceptable approach in this setting.

Laparoscopic surgery for perforated peptic ulcer: an English national population-based cohort study.

Randomized controlled trials have shown that laparoscopic approach to surgery for perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) is associated with improved short-term outcomes; however, there is limited evidence concerning national practice. The aim of this investigation was to evaluate the effect of laparoscopic approach to PPU surgery upon mortality and morbidity in England. Patients with a primary diagnosis of PPU, admitted as an emergency to a hospital in England, and receiving surgical intervention, between 2005 and 2012 were identified from the Hospital Episode Statistics database. Outcomes analyzed included 30-day and 90-day mortality, 30-day complications, and length of hospital stay. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify patient, hospital, and treatment-related factors associated with use of laparoscopy and mortality. The study included 13,022 patients who underwent emergency surgery for PPU in England over an 8-year period. From 2005 to 2012, the utilization of laparoscopic surgery for PPU increased from 0 to 13% and was more commonly used in high volume emergency centers. Laparoscopic surgery was associated with significant reductions in 30-day (7% vs. 15.7%; P < 0.001) and 90-day mortality (8.9% vs. 19.6%; P < 0.001), pneumonia (6% vs. 10.1%; P < 0.001), ischemic cardiac events (1% vs. 2.4%; P = 0.007), as well as length of hospital stay (median 5 vs. 7 days; P < 0.001). Factors associated with a reduced utilization of laparoscopic surgery included age ≥ 70years (Odds ratio (OR) = 0.58 (95% CI) 0.49-0.68) and Charlson Comorbidity Index score ≥ 2 (OR = 0.73; 95% CI 0.57-0.94). The rate of laparoscopic repair of PPU is increasing at a national level and more common in high volume emergency centers. It is associated with reduced rates of mortality; pneumonia and shorter length of hospital stay, highlighting the need for strategies to improve dissemination of laparoscopic techniques necessary for PPU repair.

Sutureless Onlay Omental Patch for the Laparoscopic Repair of Perforated Peptic Ulcers

Because the feasibility and safety of laparoscopic approaches for the treatment of perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) have been fully recognized, laparoscopic repair of PPU (LPPU) has become a widely accepted procedure. Following closure of a PPU, the rationale to add an omental patch is based on the assumptions that a patch may decrease the possibility of leakage and make the closure more secure. However, one of the often mentioned disadvantages of LPPU is that it requires a significantly longer operating time. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the efficacy of LPPU with a sutureless onlay omental patch. Over 60months, 43 patients underwent LPPU with sutureless onlay omental patch, and another 64 patients underwent LPPU with sutured omental patch. Patient demographics, operation parameters, and surgical outcomes were analyzed retrospectively. All patients in both groups survived to the end of the study. There were no leaks in either group. The operating time and length of stay in the sutureless onlay omental patch group were significantly shorter than in the sutured omental patch group. A sutureless onlay omental patch is as safe and effective as a sutured omental patch for the laparoscopic repair of PPU.

Laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer: single-center results

Perforated peptic ulcer (PPU), the most common indication for emergency gastric surgery, is associated with high morbidity and mortality rates. Outcomes might be improved by performing this procedure laparoscopically, but no consensus exists on whether the benefits of laparoscopic repair (LR) of PPU outweigh the disadvantages. From January 2002 to December 2012, 111 patients underwent surgery for perforated ulcer. A "laparoscopy-first" policy was attempted and then applied for 56 patients. The exclusion criteria for LR ruled out patients who had shock at admission, severe cardiorespiratory comorbidities, or a history of supramesocolic surgery. The aim of this study was a retrospective analysis of the 56 patients treated laparoscopically. The patient distribution was 30 men and 26 women, who had a mean age of 59 years (range 19-95 years). The mean ulcer size was 10 mm, and the Mannheim peritonitis index (MPI) was 21. LR was performed for 39 (69.6%) of the 56 patients and included peritoneal lavage, suturing of the perforation, and omental patching. Conversion to laparotomy was necessary in 17 cases (30.4%). The "conversion group" showed significant differences in ulcer size (larger ulcers: 1.9 vs. 0.7 mm; p < 0.01), ulcer-site topography (higher incidence of posterior ulcers: 5 vs. 0; p < 0.01), and MPI score (higher score: 24 vs. 20; p < 0.05). The LR group had a mean operating time of 86 min (range 50-125 min), an in-hospital morbidity rate of 7.6 %, a mortality rate of 2.5%, and a mean hospital stay of 6.7 days (range 5-12 days). None of these patients required reintervention. The results showed that LR for PPU is feasible with acceptable mortality and morbidity rates. Skill in laparoscopic abdominal emergencies is required. Perforations 1.5 cm or larger, posterior duodenal ulcers, and an MPI higher than 25 should be considered the main risk factors for conversion.

Endoscope-Assisted Laparoscopic Repair of Perforated Peptic Ulcers

Laparoscopic repairs for perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) are likely to fail in patients with shock, gastric outlet obstruction, or large perforations. This prospective study was performed to evaluate a revised approach of laparoscopic repair with endoscopic assistance to treat these patients. Between April 2001 and February 2002, 30 consecutive patients with PPU were enrolled in this study. The mean age was 43.1 +/- 12.2 years. Male to female ratio was 27:2. One patient was excluded from laparoscopic repair due to a gastric outlet obstruction. The other 29 patients were managed according to a protocol of preoperative upper endoscopy and laparoscopic intracorporeal suture repair with an omental patch. The average operative time was 58.1 +/- 13.5 minutes (range, 36-96 min). The average diameter of perforation was 4.2 +/- 2.0 mm (range, 1-12 mm). The average time to resume oral fluids was 3.2 +/- 0.8 days (range, 2-8 days). The average hospital stay was 4.7 +/- 1.1 days (range, 3-10 days). There was no leakage or mortality. Most patients did not receive parenteral analgesics postoperatively. We conclude that endoscope-assisted laparoscopic repair for PPU is safe and effective. This revised technique allows surgeons to exclude patients who are likely to fail the laparoscopic repair.