Laparoscopic surgical treatment of perforated duodenal ulcer.

Chirurgia italiana Pub Date : 2009-05-01
Vincenzo Minutolo, Giuseppe Gagliano, Calogero Rinzivillo, Orazio Minutolo, Maurizio Carnazza, Agostino Racalbuto, Salvatore Dipietro, Giovanni Li Destri
{"title":"Laparoscopic surgical treatment of perforated duodenal ulcer.","authors":"Vincenzo Minutolo,&nbsp;Giuseppe Gagliano,&nbsp;Calogero Rinzivillo,&nbsp;Orazio Minutolo,&nbsp;Maurizio Carnazza,&nbsp;Agostino Racalbuto,&nbsp;Salvatore Dipietro,&nbsp;Giovanni Li Destri","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Perforation of peptic ulcer is a surgical emergency which still carries a risk of mortality. The main risk factors are delayed diagnosis > 24 hours, ASA-III or ASA-IV, age over 70 years, and associated cardiorespiratory pathologies. There is no unanimous consensus regarding the gold standard treatment of such complications. In this study we report our experience and analyse the literature with the aim of assessing the possible advantages of laparoscopic treatment of perforated duodenal ulcers versus open surgery. From April 2003 to December 2008, 39 patients underwent laparoscopic repair and 7 patients open repair of perforated duodenal ulcer. The following parameters were evaluated in all patients: operative time, duration of hospital stay, time to intestinal canalisation, morbidity and mortality. The conversion rate, in laparoscopic treated patients, was 0%. The mean operative time was longer in the laparoscopic group than in the open group (76.15 +/- 9.49 vs. 63.57 +/- 15.19 minutes; Mann Whitney test p < 0.05). The laparoscopic cases had a shorter mean hospital stay than the open cases (5.8 +/- 1.02 vs. 7.8 +/-1.34 days; Mann Whitney test p < 0.001). The time to canalisation in the two groups of patients was similar. One patient (2.56%) in the laparoscopic group and two (28.57%) in the open repair group presented morbidity in the postoperative period. One patient (ASA IV) in the open group died. Laparoscopic treatment in the emergency setting is a safe, reliable procedure, affording all the advantages of the minimally invasive approach.</p>","PeriodicalId":75700,"journal":{"name":"Chirurgia italiana","volume":"61 3","pages":"309-13"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chirurgia italiana","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Perforation of peptic ulcer is a surgical emergency which still carries a risk of mortality. The main risk factors are delayed diagnosis > 24 hours, ASA-III or ASA-IV, age over 70 years, and associated cardiorespiratory pathologies. There is no unanimous consensus regarding the gold standard treatment of such complications. In this study we report our experience and analyse the literature with the aim of assessing the possible advantages of laparoscopic treatment of perforated duodenal ulcers versus open surgery. From April 2003 to December 2008, 39 patients underwent laparoscopic repair and 7 patients open repair of perforated duodenal ulcer. The following parameters were evaluated in all patients: operative time, duration of hospital stay, time to intestinal canalisation, morbidity and mortality. The conversion rate, in laparoscopic treated patients, was 0%. The mean operative time was longer in the laparoscopic group than in the open group (76.15 +/- 9.49 vs. 63.57 +/- 15.19 minutes; Mann Whitney test p < 0.05). The laparoscopic cases had a shorter mean hospital stay than the open cases (5.8 +/- 1.02 vs. 7.8 +/-1.34 days; Mann Whitney test p < 0.001). The time to canalisation in the two groups of patients was similar. One patient (2.56%) in the laparoscopic group and two (28.57%) in the open repair group presented morbidity in the postoperative period. One patient (ASA IV) in the open group died. Laparoscopic treatment in the emergency setting is a safe, reliable procedure, affording all the advantages of the minimally invasive approach.

十二指肠溃疡穿孔的腹腔镜手术治疗。
消化性溃疡穿孔是一种外科急症,仍然有死亡的危险。主要危险因素为延迟诊断> 24小时、ASA-III或ASA-IV、年龄超过70岁及相关心肺病变。对于这类并发症的金标准治疗并没有一致的共识。在这项研究中,我们报告了我们的经验并分析了文献,目的是评估腹腔镜治疗十二指肠溃疡穿孔与开放手术的可能优势。2003年4月至2008年12月,39例患者行腹腔镜修补术,7例患者行十二指肠溃疡穿孔开腹修补术。对所有患者的以下参数进行评估:手术时间、住院时间、肠通管时间、发病率和死亡率。在腹腔镜治疗的患者中,转换率为0%。腹腔镜组平均手术时间较开放组长(76.15 +/- 9.49 vs. 63.57 +/- 15.19 min;Mann Whitney检验p < 0.05)。腹腔镜组的平均住院时间短于开腹组(5.8 +/- 1.02 vs. 7.8 +/-1.34);曼-惠特尼检验p < 0.001)。两组患者的通管时间相似。腹腔镜组术后发病1例(2.56%),开放式修复组术后发病2例(28.57%)。开放组死亡1例(ASA IV)。在紧急情况下,腹腔镜治疗是一种安全、可靠的方法,具有微创方法的所有优点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信