A comparison of laparoscopic versus open repair for the surgical treatment of perforated peptic ulcers

Gerardo Domínguez-Vega; Manuel Pera; José M. Ramón; Sonia Puig; Estela Membrilla; Joan Sancho; Luis Grande

doi:10.1016/j.ciresp.2012.10.016

A comparison of laparoscopic versus open repair for the surgical treatment of perforated peptic ulcers

Gerardo Domínguez-Vega, Manuel Pera, José M. Ramón, Sonia Puig, Estela Membrilla, Joan Sancho, Luis Grande

Department of Surgery

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Research › peer-review

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To analyse the outcomes of laparoscopic versus open repair for perforated peptic ulcers (PPU). Methods: All patients undergoing PPU repair between January 2002 and March 2012 were included in the study. Demographic characteristics, operation time, complications, and length of hospital stay were evaluated. Results: Two hundred and twelve patients (median age, 49 years) were included, 60 in the laparoscopic group and 52 in the open group. Patients operated laparoscopically were significantly younger and had a higher consumption of tobacco, alcohol and cannabis. Median acute symptoms time was shorter in the laparoscopic group (6. h) compared to the open group (12. h; P=025) Symptoms time was shorter in the laparoscopic group. Median operating time was significantly longer in the laparoscopic group (104.5. min vs. 76. min, P=025). The percentage of conversion to open repair was 25%. There was no difference in morbidity between 2 groups, but there were 3 deaths in the open group. Median hospital stay was significantly shorter in patients treated laparoscopically when compared with the open group (6 days vs. 8 days; P=041). Conclusion: Laparoscopic and open repair are equally safe in the management of PPU. A shorter hospital stay can be achieved in the laparoscopic group. © 2012 AEC.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	372-377
Journal	Cirugia Espanola
Volume	91
Issue number	6
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ciresp.2012.10.016
Publication status	Published - 1 Jun 2013

Keywords

Diagnosis
Laparoscopy
Peptic ulcer
Perforation
Surgery

Access to Document

10.1016/j.ciresp.2012.10.016

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'A comparison of laparoscopic versus open repair for the surgical treatment of perforated peptic ulcers'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this

@article{dbd23c9f56ff4d94b52e21545add695a,

title = "A comparison of laparoscopic versus open repair for the surgical treatment of perforated peptic ulcers",

abstract = "Objective: To analyse the outcomes of laparoscopic versus open repair for perforated peptic ulcers (PPU). Methods: All patients undergoing PPU repair between January 2002 and March 2012 were included in the study. Demographic characteristics, operation time, complications, and length of hospital stay were evaluated. Results: Two hundred and twelve patients (median age, 49 years) were included, 60 in the laparoscopic group and 52 in the open group. Patients operated laparoscopically were significantly younger and had a higher consumption of tobacco, alcohol and cannabis. Median acute symptoms time was shorter in the laparoscopic group (6. h) compared to the open group (12. h; P=025) Symptoms time was shorter in the laparoscopic group. Median operating time was significantly longer in the laparoscopic group (104.5. min vs. 76. min, P=025). The percentage of conversion to open repair was 25%. There was no difference in morbidity between 2 groups, but there were 3 deaths in the open group. Median hospital stay was significantly shorter in patients treated laparoscopically when compared with the open group (6 days vs. 8 days; P=041). Conclusion: Laparoscopic and open repair are equally safe in the management of PPU. A shorter hospital stay can be achieved in the laparoscopic group. {\textcopyright} 2012 AEC.",

keywords = "Diagnosis, Laparoscopy, Peptic ulcer, Perforation, Surgery",

author = "Gerardo Dom{\'i}nguez-Vega and Manuel Pera and Ram{\'o}n, {Jos{\'e} M.} and Sonia Puig and Estela Membrilla and Joan Sancho and Luis Grande",

year = "2013",

month = jun,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1016/j.ciresp.2012.10.016",

language = "English",

volume = "91",

pages = "372--377",

number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A comparison of laparoscopic versus open repair for the surgical treatment of perforated peptic ulcers

AU - Domínguez-Vega, Gerardo

AU - Pera, Manuel

AU - Ramón, José M.

AU - Puig, Sonia

AU - Membrilla, Estela

AU - Sancho, Joan

AU - Grande, Luis

PY - 2013/6/1

Y1 - 2013/6/1

N2 - Objective: To analyse the outcomes of laparoscopic versus open repair for perforated peptic ulcers (PPU). Methods: All patients undergoing PPU repair between January 2002 and March 2012 were included in the study. Demographic characteristics, operation time, complications, and length of hospital stay were evaluated. Results: Two hundred and twelve patients (median age, 49 years) were included, 60 in the laparoscopic group and 52 in the open group. Patients operated laparoscopically were significantly younger and had a higher consumption of tobacco, alcohol and cannabis. Median acute symptoms time was shorter in the laparoscopic group (6. h) compared to the open group (12. h; P=025) Symptoms time was shorter in the laparoscopic group. Median operating time was significantly longer in the laparoscopic group (104.5. min vs. 76. min, P=025). The percentage of conversion to open repair was 25%. There was no difference in morbidity between 2 groups, but there were 3 deaths in the open group. Median hospital stay was significantly shorter in patients treated laparoscopically when compared with the open group (6 days vs. 8 days; P=041). Conclusion: Laparoscopic and open repair are equally safe in the management of PPU. A shorter hospital stay can be achieved in the laparoscopic group. © 2012 AEC.

AB - Objective: To analyse the outcomes of laparoscopic versus open repair for perforated peptic ulcers (PPU). Methods: All patients undergoing PPU repair between January 2002 and March 2012 were included in the study. Demographic characteristics, operation time, complications, and length of hospital stay were evaluated. Results: Two hundred and twelve patients (median age, 49 years) were included, 60 in the laparoscopic group and 52 in the open group. Patients operated laparoscopically were significantly younger and had a higher consumption of tobacco, alcohol and cannabis. Median acute symptoms time was shorter in the laparoscopic group (6. h) compared to the open group (12. h; P=025) Symptoms time was shorter in the laparoscopic group. Median operating time was significantly longer in the laparoscopic group (104.5. min vs. 76. min, P=025). The percentage of conversion to open repair was 25%. There was no difference in morbidity between 2 groups, but there were 3 deaths in the open group. Median hospital stay was significantly shorter in patients treated laparoscopically when compared with the open group (6 days vs. 8 days; P=041). Conclusion: Laparoscopic and open repair are equally safe in the management of PPU. A shorter hospital stay can be achieved in the laparoscopic group. © 2012 AEC.

KW - Diagnosis

KW - Laparoscopy

KW - Peptic ulcer

KW - Perforation

KW - Surgery

U2 - 10.1016/j.ciresp.2012.10.016

DO - 10.1016/j.ciresp.2012.10.016

M3 - Article

VL - 91

SP - 372

EP - 377

IS - 6

ER -