Abstract
Peptic ulcer perforation is a common life-threatening emergency needing immediate intervention. Laparoscopic closure of perforation is now widely practiced over conventional open closure. This study aimed to compare laparoscopic peptic ulcer perforation closure with conventional open closure in terms of operative time, postoperative analgesia, complications, hospital stay, and return to routine activities. This unicentric, nonblinded, prospective, randomized study was carried out in 50 patients with peptic ulcer perforation who were randomly allocated to undergo either laparoscopic closure or open closure surgery with 25 patients in each group. The mean operative time (60 vs 90 min) was less in the laparoscopic group (p < 0.05). Postoperative analgesia requirements (1 vs 6 days) were also less in laparoscopic patients (p < 0.05). Complications (nil vs 6; p < 0.05) and hospital stay (3 vs 8 days) were less in laparoscopic patients (p < 0.05). Patients return to normal activities (5 vs 10 days; p < 0.05) earlier in laparoscopic perforation closure than in open closure. Our study has shown better outcomes and lesser morbidities with laparoscopic approach in terms of shorter operative time, shorter hospital stay, less analgesic requirements, and less wound infections. Patients also return to routine activities earlier with the laparoscopic approach. It is a safe alternative to open surgery and should be a preferred choice when there are no contraindications to laparoscopy.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Golash V (2008) Ten-year retrospective comparative analysis of laparoscopic repair versus open closure of perforated peptic ulcer. Oman Med J 23(4):241–246
Mehendale VG, Shenoy SN, Joshi AM, Chaudhari NC (2002) Laparoscopic versus open surgical closure of perforated duodenal ulcer: a comparative study. Indian J Gastroenterol 21(6):222–224
Siu WT et al (2002) Laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer. Ann Surg 235(3):313–319
Lau WY, Leung KL, Zhu XL, Lam YH, Chung HC, Li AK (1995) Laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer. Br J Surg 82(6):814–816
Marietta J et al (2009) Randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus open repair of perforated peptic ulcer: the LAMA trial. World J Surg 33(7):1368–1373
Bhogal RH, Athwal R, Durkin D, Deakin M, Cheruvu CN (2008) Comparison of open and laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer disease. World J Surg 32(11):2371–2374
Bertleff MJ, Lange JF (2010) Laparoscopic correction of perforated peptic ulcer: first choice? A review of literature. Surg Endoscope 24(6):1231–1239
Ates M, Sevil S, Bakircioqlu E, Colock C (2007) Laparoscopic repair of peptic ulcer perforation without omental patch versus conventional open repair. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 17(5):615–619
Lunevicius R, Morkevicius M (2005) Systemic review comparing laparoscopic and open repair of perforated peptic ulcer. Br J Surg 92(10):1195–1207
Nicolau AE, Merlan V, Vestl V, Micu B, Beuran M (2008) Laparoscopic suture repair of perforated peptic ulcer without risk factor. Chirurgia (Bucur) 103(6):629–633
Conflict of Interest
None
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Shah, F.H., Mehta, S.G., Gandhi, M.D. et al. Laparoscopic Peptic Ulcer Perforation Closure: the Preferred Choice. Indian J Surg 77 (Suppl 2), 403–406 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12262-013-0853-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12262-013-0853-0