Comparison between Laparoscopic and Open Repair of Perforated Duodenal Ulcer.

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

Department of General Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of Cairo, Egypt

Abstract

Background: A fatal consequence of peptic ulcer (PU) is perforation, which necessitates prompt surgical
intervention. The easiest, most dependable, and best option is to simply close the hole with an omental patch.
Laparoscopic repair of a perforated duodenal ulcer is preferable to open repair in terms of less discomfort, less time
spent in the hospital, improved wound healing, and decreased risk of incisional hernias.
Aim of work: to compare the postoperative outcome of laparoscopic repair of perforated duodenal ulcer, with the
outcome of the conventional open repair using omental patch in both groups.
Patients and methods: this prospective comparative study was conducted in emergency department of
Kasralainy hospital, Cairo University and included 40 patients presenting with acute abdominal pain and diagnosed
with perforated duodenal ulcer divided into 2 groups 20 patients for each group.
Result: Group underwent open repair, mean duration of the operation was shorter with higher rate of surgical
site infection and longer post-operative hospital stay. Group underwent laparoscopic repair, mean duration of
the operation was longer, with shorter mean post-operative hospital stay and less incidence of postoperative
complications.
Conclusion: we suggest that laparoscopic repair of a perforated duodenal ulcer is a safe and dependable surgery
that should be considered for all patients providing that necessary expertise is available.

Keywords

Ain Shams Journal of Surgery
Volume 17, Issue 4
October 2024
Pages 316-322

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics