Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Outcomes of Salvage Emergency Surgery for Bleeding Peptic Ulcer

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Indian Journal of Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The goals of management of bleeding peptic ulcer disease (BPUD) are early diagnosis, prompt resuscitation, and urgent endoscopy to stop bleeding. Last few decades have witnessed a diminishing role of surgery in the management of BPUD. When non-operative strategies such as endoscopy and angioembolization fail to achieve hemostasis, surgery is used as the last resort. This is a case series analysis of 70 patients with BPUD who underwent emergency surgery from January 2002 to December 2014. Demographic profile, clinical parameters, and perioperative outcomes were studied. Baseline data of survivors was compared with non-survivors. Outcome of patients with > 2 endoscopic attempts was compared with ≤ 2 endoscopic attempt patients. Mean age of the patients was 68.5 years (range 38–93) and majority were male (85.7%). Thirty-nine patients (55.7%) had duodenal ulcers (DU). Among patients with gastric ulcers (GU), the most common location was incisura (n = 16, 51.6%). Most patients had two endoscopic procedures before surgery was undertaken. The most frequent operations performed were under running of duodenal ulcer (n = 40, 57.1%). Fifty-nine patients (84.3%) developed complications and 30-day mortality was 15.7%. There was no difference in demographic and clinical profile of survivors compared to non-survivors. Patients who received > 2 endoscopies had lower hemoglobin (p = 0.01) compared to patients with ≤ 2 endoscopies, but there was no difference in 30-day mortality (p = 0.68). Exhaustive non-operative strategy and reserving surgery as salvage in refractory BPUD gives acceptable outcomes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Sung JJY, Kuipers EJ, El-Serag HB (2009) Systematic review: the global incidence and prevalence of peptic ulcer disease. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 29:938–946

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Rosenstock SJ, Møller MH, Larsson H, Johnsen SP, Madsen AH, Bendix J, Adamsen S, Jensen AG, Zimmermann-Nielsen E, Nielsen AS, Kallehave F, Oxholm D, Skarbye M, Jølving LR, Jørgensen HS, de Muckadell OBS, Thomsen RW (2013) Improving quality of care in peptic ulcer bleeding: nationwide cohort study of 13,498 consecutive patients in the Danish Clinical Register of Emergency Surgery. Am J Gastroenterol 108:1449–1457

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Forrest JA, Finlayson ND, Shearman DJ (1974) Endoscopy in gastrointestinal bleeding. Lancet (London, England) 2:394–397

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems 10th Revision (2011)

  5. Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML, Vauthey JN, Dindo D, Schulick RD, de Santibañes E, Pekolj J, Slankamenac K, Bassi C, Graf R, Vonlanthen R, Padbury R, Cameron JL, Makuuchi M (2009) The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications. Ann Surg 250:187–196

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Anbalakan K, Chua D, Pandya GJ, Shelat VG (2015) Five year experience in management of perforated peptic ulcer and validation of common mortality risk prediction models – are existing models sufficient? A retrospective cohort study. Int J Surg Elsevier 14:38–44

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Chiu PWY, Ng EKW, Wong SKH, Teoh AYB, Cheung FKY, Yung MY, Sung JJY, Lau JYW (2009) Surgical salvage of bleeding peptic ulcers after failed therapeutic endoscopy. Dig Surg 26:243–248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Wang BW, Mok KT, Chang HT, Liu SI, Chou NH, Tsai CC, Chen IS (1998) APACHE II score: a useful tool for risk assessment and an aid to decision-making in emergency operation for bleeding gastric ulcer. J Am Coll Surg 187:287–294

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Morris DL, Hawker PC, Brearley S, Simms M, Dykes PW, Keighley MR (1984) Optimal timing of operation for bleeding peptic ulcer: prospective randomised trial. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). BMJ Publishing Group 288:1277–1280

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Chereau N, Chandeze M-M, Tantardini C, Trésallet C, Lefevre JH, Parc Y, Menegaux F (2016) Antroduodenectomy with gastroduodenal anastomosis: salvage emergency surgery for complicated peptic ulcer disease—results of a double institution study of 35 patients. J Gastrointest Surg 20:539–545

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Poxon VA, Keighley MRB, Dykes PW, Heppinstall K, Jaderberg M (1991) Comparison of minimal and conventional surgery in patients with bleeding peptic ulcer: a multicentre trial. Br J Surg 78:1344–1345

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Schein M, Rogers PN, Poxon VA, Keighley MRB (1992) Comparison of minimal and conventional surgery in patients with bleeding peptic ulcer: a multicentre trial. Br J Surg 79:842–842

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Sacks HS, Chalmers TC, Blum AL, Berrier J, Pagano D (1990) Endoscopic hemostasis. An effective therapy for bleeding peptic ulcers. JAMA J Am Med Assoc 264:494–499

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Cook DJ, Guyatt GH, Salena BJ, Laine LA (1992) Endoscopic therapy for acute nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage: a meta-analysis. Gastroenterology. 102:139–148

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Shelat VG, Chia VJM, Low J (2015) Common bile duct exploration in an elderly Asian population. Int Surg 100:261–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Yeo CSW, Tay VWY, Low JK, Woon WWL, Punamiya SJ, Shelat VG (2016) Outcomes of percutaneous cholecystostomy and predictors of eventual cholecystectomy. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Sci 23:65–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Ohmann C, Imhof M, Röher H-D (2000) Trends in peptic ulcer bleeding and surgical treatment. World J Surg 24:284–293

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Lau JYW, Sung JJY, Lee KKC, Yung M, Wong SKH, Wu JCY, Chan FKL, Ng EKW, You JHS, Lee CW, Chan ACW, Chung SCS (2000) Effect of intravenous omeprazole on recurrent bleeding after endoscopic treatment of bleeding peptic ulcers. N Engl J Med 343:310–316

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Kim SB, Lee SH, Kim KO, Jang BI, Kim TN, Jeon SW, Kwon JG, Kim EY, Jung JT, Park KS, Cho KB, Kim ES, Kim HJ, Park CK, Park JB, Yang CH (2016) Risk factors associated with rebleeding in patients with high risk peptic ulcer bleeding: focusing on the role of second look endoscopy. Dig Dis Sci 61:517–522

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. El Ouali S, Barkun AN, Wyse J, Romagnuolo J, Sung JJY, Gralnek IM et al (2012) Is routine second-look endoscopy effective after endoscopic hemostasis in acute peptic ulcer bleeding? A meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc 76:283–292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Gilliam AD, Speake WJ, Lobo DN, Beckingham IJ (2003) Current practice of emergency vagotomy andHelicobacter pylori eradication for complicated peptic ulcer in the United Kingdom. Br J Surg 90:88–90

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Kubba AK, Choudari C, Rajgopal C, Palmer KR (1996) The outcome of urgent surgery for major peptic ulcer haemorrhage following failed endoscopic therapy. Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol 8:1175–1178

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Dousset B, Suc B, Boudet MJ, Cherqui D, Rotman N, Julien M, Fagniez PL (1995) Surgical treatment of severe ulcerous hemorrhages: predictive factors of operative mortality. Gastroenterol Clin Biol 19:259–265

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Reuben BC, Neumayer LA (2006) Variations reported in surgical practice for bleeding duodenal ulcers. Am J Surg 192:e42–e45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Wong TCL, Wong K-T, Chiu PWY, Teoh AYB, Yu SCH, Au KWL, Lau JYW (2011) A comparison of angiographic embolization with surgery after failed endoscopic hemostasis to bleeding peptic ulcers. Gastrointest Endosc 73:900–908

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Eriksson L-G, Ljungdahl M, Sundbom M, Nyman R (2008) Transcatheter arterial embolization versus surgery in the treatment of upper gastrointestinal bleeding after therapeutic endoscopy failure. J Vasc Interv Radiol 19:1413–1418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Chia C, Pandya GJ, Kamalesh A, Shelat VG (2015) Splenic artery pseudoaneurysm masquerading as a pancreatic cyst—a diagnostic challenge. Int Surg 100:1069–1071

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Mille M, Huber J, Wlasak R, Engelhardt T, Hillner Y, Kriechling H, Aschenbach R, Ende K, Scharf JG, Puls R, Stier A (2015) Prophylactic transcatheter arterial embolization after successful endoscopic hemostasis in the management of bleeding duodenal ulcer. J Clin Gastroenterol 49:738–745

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Beggs A, Dilworth M, Powell S, Atherton H, Griffiths E (2014) A systematic review of transarterial embolization versus emergency surgery in treatment of major nonvariceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding. Clin Exp Gastroenterol 7:93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Wedi E, Fischer A, Hochberger J, Jung C, Orkut S, Richter-Schrag HJ (2018) Multicenter evaluation of first-line endoscopic treatment with the OTSC in acute non-variceal upper gastrointestinal bleeding and comparison with the Rockall cohort: the FLETRock study. Surg Endosc 32:307–314

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Sengkang General Hospital, Singapore, Singapore

    M. L. Ho

  2. Department of General Surgery, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, Annexs 1, 11 Jln Tan Tock Seng, Singapore, 308433, Singapore

    Saleem Ahmed & Vishalkumar G. Shelat

Authors
  1. M. L. Ho
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Saleem Ahmed
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Vishalkumar G. Shelat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Saleem Ahmed.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Novel aspects of paper

1. There has been a dearth of literature on the outcomes of surgery for bleeding peptic ulcer, a commonly encountered surgical emergency, in the last decade despite the advances in endoscopy, surgery, interventional radiology, and critical care.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ho, M.L., Ahmed, S. & Shelat, V.G. Outcomes of Salvage Emergency Surgery for Bleeding Peptic Ulcer. Indian J Surg 83 (Suppl 1), 105–112 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12262-020-02358-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12262-020-02358-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation