不同手术方式治疗胃溃疡穿孔的疗效及术后并发症的回顾性比较研究。

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Yu-Fan Pang, Liang Shu, Cheng-Wei Xia
{"title":"不同手术方式治疗胃溃疡穿孔的疗效及术后并发症的回顾性比较研究。","authors":"Yu-Fan Pang, Liang Shu, Cheng-Wei Xia","doi":"10.4240/wjgs.v17.i2.101896","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Gastric ulcer perforation is a critical condition that can lead to significant morbidity and mortality if not promptly addressed. It is often the result of chronic peptic ulcer disease, which is characterized by a breach in the gastric wall due to ulceration. Surgical intervention is essential for managing this life-threatening complication. However, the optimal surgical technique remains debatable among clinicians. Various methods have been employed, including simple closure, omental patch repair, and partial gastrectomy, each with distinct advantages and disadvantages. Understanding the comparative efficacy and postoperative outcomes of these techniques is crucial for improving patient care and surgical decision-making. This study addresses the need for a comprehensive analysis in this area.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To compare the efficacy and postoperative complications of different surgical methods for the treatment of gastric ulcer perforation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective analysis was conducted on 120 patients who underwent surgery for gastric ulcer perforation between September 2020 and June 2023. The patients were divided into three groups based on the surgical method: Simple closure, omental patch repair, and partial gastrectomy. The primary outcomes were the operative success rate and incidence of postoperative complications. Secondary outcomes included the length of hospital stay, recovery time, and long-term quality of life.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The operative success rates for simple closure, omental patch repair, and partial gastrectomy were 92.5%, 95%, and 97.5%, respectively. Postoperative complications occurred in 20%, 15%, and 17.5% of patients in each group, respectively. The partial gastrectomy group showed a significantly longer operative time (<i>P</i> < 0.001) but the lowest rate of ulcer recurrence (2.5%, <i>P</i> < 0.05). The omental patch repair group demonstrated the shortest hospital stay (mean 7.2 days, <i>P</i> < 0.05) and fastest recovery time.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>While all three surgical methods showed high success rates, omental patch repair demonstrated the best overall outcomes, with a balance of high efficacy, low complication rates, and shorter recovery time. However, the choice of the surgical method should be tailored to individual patient factors and the surgeon's expertise.</p>","PeriodicalId":23759,"journal":{"name":"World Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery","volume":"17 2","pages":"101896"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11886023/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Retrospective comparative study of different surgical methods for gastric ulcer perforation: Efficacy and postoperative complications.\",\"authors\":\"Yu-Fan Pang, Liang Shu, Cheng-Wei Xia\",\"doi\":\"10.4240/wjgs.v17.i2.101896\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Gastric ulcer perforation is a critical condition that can lead to significant morbidity and mortality if not promptly addressed. It is often the result of chronic peptic ulcer disease, which is characterized by a breach in the gastric wall due to ulceration. Surgical intervention is essential for managing this life-threatening complication. However, the optimal surgical technique remains debatable among clinicians. Various methods have been employed, including simple closure, omental patch repair, and partial gastrectomy, each with distinct advantages and disadvantages. Understanding the comparative efficacy and postoperative outcomes of these techniques is crucial for improving patient care and surgical decision-making. This study addresses the need for a comprehensive analysis in this area.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To compare the efficacy and postoperative complications of different surgical methods for the treatment of gastric ulcer perforation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective analysis was conducted on 120 patients who underwent surgery for gastric ulcer perforation between September 2020 and June 2023. The patients were divided into three groups based on the surgical method: Simple closure, omental patch repair, and partial gastrectomy. The primary outcomes were the operative success rate and incidence of postoperative complications. Secondary outcomes included the length of hospital stay, recovery time, and long-term quality of life.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The operative success rates for simple closure, omental patch repair, and partial gastrectomy were 92.5%, 95%, and 97.5%, respectively. Postoperative complications occurred in 20%, 15%, and 17.5% of patients in each group, respectively. The partial gastrectomy group showed a significantly longer operative time (<i>P</i> < 0.001) but the lowest rate of ulcer recurrence (2.5%, <i>P</i> < 0.05). The omental patch repair group demonstrated the shortest hospital stay (mean 7.2 days, <i>P</i> < 0.05) and fastest recovery time.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>While all three surgical methods showed high success rates, omental patch repair demonstrated the best overall outcomes, with a balance of high efficacy, low complication rates, and shorter recovery time. However, the choice of the surgical method should be tailored to individual patient factors and the surgeon's expertise.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23759,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"World Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery\",\"volume\":\"17 2\",\"pages\":\"101896\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11886023/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"World Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4240/wjgs.v17.i2.101896\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Journal of Gastrointestinal Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4240/wjgs.v17.i2.101896","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:胃溃疡穿孔是一种严重的疾病,如果不及时处理,可能导致显著的发病率和死亡率。它通常是慢性消化性溃疡疾病的结果,其特征是胃壁因溃疡而破裂。手术干预对于治疗这种危及生命的并发症至关重要。然而,最佳的手术技术在临床医生中仍有争议。各种方法已被采用,包括简单闭合、网膜补片修复和部分胃切除术,每种方法都有其独特的优点和缺点。了解这些技术的比较疗效和术后结果对于改善患者护理和手术决策至关重要。本研究解决了对这一领域进行全面分析的需要。目的:比较不同手术方式治疗胃溃疡穿孔的疗效及术后并发症。方法:回顾性分析2020年9月至2023年6月期间接受胃溃疡穿孔手术的120例患者。根据手术方式将患者分为单纯封闭、网膜补片修复和部分胃切除术三组。主要观察手术成功率和术后并发症发生率。次要结局包括住院时间、恢复时间和长期生活质量。结果:单纯封闭、大网膜补片修复、胃部分切除术的手术成功率分别为92.5%、95%、97.5%。两组患者术后并发症发生率分别为20%、15%和17.5%。胃部分切除术组手术时间明显延长(P < 0.001),溃疡复发率最低(2.5%,P < 0.05)。网膜贴片修复组住院时间最短(平均7.2天,P < 0.05),恢复时间最快。结论:三种手术方法均具有较高的成功率,其中网膜补片修复具有疗效高、并发症发生率低、恢复时间短的综合效果最佳。然而,手术方法的选择应根据个别患者的因素和外科医生的专业知识进行调整。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Retrospective comparative study of different surgical methods for gastric ulcer perforation: Efficacy and postoperative complications.

Background: Gastric ulcer perforation is a critical condition that can lead to significant morbidity and mortality if not promptly addressed. It is often the result of chronic peptic ulcer disease, which is characterized by a breach in the gastric wall due to ulceration. Surgical intervention is essential for managing this life-threatening complication. However, the optimal surgical technique remains debatable among clinicians. Various methods have been employed, including simple closure, omental patch repair, and partial gastrectomy, each with distinct advantages and disadvantages. Understanding the comparative efficacy and postoperative outcomes of these techniques is crucial for improving patient care and surgical decision-making. This study addresses the need for a comprehensive analysis in this area.

Aim: To compare the efficacy and postoperative complications of different surgical methods for the treatment of gastric ulcer perforation.

Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 120 patients who underwent surgery for gastric ulcer perforation between September 2020 and June 2023. The patients were divided into three groups based on the surgical method: Simple closure, omental patch repair, and partial gastrectomy. The primary outcomes were the operative success rate and incidence of postoperative complications. Secondary outcomes included the length of hospital stay, recovery time, and long-term quality of life.

Results: The operative success rates for simple closure, omental patch repair, and partial gastrectomy were 92.5%, 95%, and 97.5%, respectively. Postoperative complications occurred in 20%, 15%, and 17.5% of patients in each group, respectively. The partial gastrectomy group showed a significantly longer operative time (P < 0.001) but the lowest rate of ulcer recurrence (2.5%, P < 0.05). The omental patch repair group demonstrated the shortest hospital stay (mean 7.2 days, P < 0.05) and fastest recovery time.

Conclusion: While all three surgical methods showed high success rates, omental patch repair demonstrated the best overall outcomes, with a balance of high efficacy, low complication rates, and shorter recovery time. However, the choice of the surgical method should be tailored to individual patient factors and the surgeon's expertise.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
5.00%
发文量
111
×
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