Laparoscopic versus Open Primary Repair for Perforated Peptic Ulcer

Choi, Kun Moo; Kim, Ji Hoon; Kwak, Jin Ho; Jang, Hyuk Jai; Han, Myoung Sik

Abstract

PURPOSE
Simple closure, regardless of using an omental patch, continues to be the preferred option for many surgeons. It is a easy, quick and safe operation, and it can be applied to all situations by every surgeon. The purpose of this study was to investigate the feasibility of routinely using laparoscopic repair for treating perforated peptic ulcer.
METHODS
A retrospective review was carried out on 68 consecutive patients who underwent patch repair for a perforated peptic ulcer; 11 underwent laparoscopic repair and 57 underwent open repair. Laparoscopic repair was performed by one surgeon at the same hospital between March, 2006 and February, 2009. Both groups were compared according to the Mann-Whitney U-test. A p value <0.05 was considered to be significant.
RESULTS
Statistical significance (p<0.05) between two groups (laparoscopic vs. open) was present regarding to the postoperative morbidity (0 vs. 16 cases, respectively), the hospital stay (4.8 vs. 12.7 days, respectively), the postoperative day of resuming an oral diet (3 vs. 5.7 days, respectively). The mean operative time of laparoscopic repair (78 minutes) was shorter than that of open repair (82 minutes) but this was not statistically significant (p=0.81). We excluded using a pain scale or assessing the use of analgesics in this study because of the popularity of IV PCA (intravenous patient-controlled analgesia).
CONCLUSION
Laparoscopic primary repair is a safe emergency procedure for treating perforated peptic ulcer patients.