Abstract
Background
Perforation accounts for 70% of deaths attributed to peptic ulcers. Laparoscopic repair is effective but infrequently used. Our aim was to assess how many patients with perforated peptic ulcer could be candidates for a transluminal endoscopic omental patch closure.
Methods
This retrospective study reviewed patients with perforated peptic ulcer from 2005 to 2010. Demographics, ulcer characteristics, operative procedure, and outcomes were recorded. Candidates for endoscopic transluminal repair were defined as those having undergone omental patch closure of an ulcer of appropriate size and no contraindications to laparoscopy or endoscopy.
Results
In the retrospective review, a total of 104 patients were identified; 62% female, mean age = 68 years, mean ASA of 3, and 63% medication-related ulcers. Fifty-nine (63%) had an omental patch (80% open), and 35 (37%) had other procedures. Ten patients had nonoperative management. Thirty-day mortality was 14% and 1 year mortality was 35%. Forty-nine patients (52%) were considered potential candidates for transluminal repair.
Conclusion
Sixty-three percent of our patients sustained a medication-related perforation with 1 year mortality of 35%. The majority of patients were treated using open omental patch repair. Transluminal endoscopic repair may provide an additional situation for a minimally invasive approach for a number of these patients.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bertleff MJ, Lange JF (2010) Perforated peptic ulcer disease: a review of history and treatment. Dig Surg 27:161–169
Yuan Y, Padol IT, Hunt RH (2006) Peptic ulcer disease today. Nat Clin Pract Gastroenterol Hepatol 3:80–89
Wang YR, Richter JE, Dempsey DT (2010) Trends and outcomes of hospitalizations for peptic ulcer disease in the United States, 1993 to 2006. Ann Surg 251:51–58
Svanes C (2000) Trends in perforated peptic ulcer: incidence, etiology, treatment, and prognosis. World J Surg 24:277–283. doi:10.1007/s002689910045
Imhof M, Epstein S, Ohmann C, Roher HD (2008) Duration of survival after peptic ulcer perforation. World J Surg 32:408–412. doi:10.1007/s00268-007-9370-2
Moller MH, Adamsen S, Thomsen RW, Moller AM (2010) Preoperative prognostic factors for mortality in peptic ulcer perforation: a systematic review. Scand J Gastroenterol 45:785–805
Moller MH, Adamsen S, Wojdemann M, Moller AM (2009) Perforated peptic ulcer: How to improve outcome? Scand J Gastroenterol 44:15–22
Dascalescu C, Andriescu L, Bulat C, Danila R, Dodu L, Acornicesei M, Radulescu C (2006) Taylor’s method: a therapeutic alternative for perforated gastroduodenal ulcer. Hepatogastroenterology 53:543–546
Bhogal RH, Athwal R, Durkin D, Deakin M, Cheruvu CN (2008) Comparison between open and laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer disease. World J Surg 32:2371–2374. doi:10.1007/s00268-008-9707-5
Bertleff MJ, Lange JF (2010) Laparoscopic correction of perforated peptic ulcer: First choice? A review of literature. Surg Endosc 24:1231–1239
Moran EA, Gostout CJ, McConico AL, Bingener J (2010) Natural orifice translumenal endoscopic surgery used for perforated viscus repair is feasible using lower peritoneal pressures than laparoscopy in a porcine model. J Am Coll Surg 210:474–479
Clavien PA, Barkun J, de Oliveira ML, Vauthey JN, Dindo D, Schulick RD, de Santibanes 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: five-year experience. Ann Surg 250:187–196
Lanas A (2008) Improving on our goal to reduce NSAID-induced GI complications: A challenging task? Am J Gastroenterol 103:1104–1105
Lagoo S, McMahon RL, Kakihara M, Pappas TN, Eubanks S (2002) The sixth decision regarding perforated duodenal ulcer. JSLS 6:359–368
Sarosi GA Jr, Jaiswal KR, Nwariaku FE, Asolati M, Fleming JB, Anthony T (2005) Surgical therapy of peptic ulcers in the 21st century: more common than you think. Am J Surg 190:775–779
Lunevicius R, Morkevicius M (2005) Risk factors influencing the early outcome results after laparoscopic repair of perforated duodenal ulcer and their predictive value. Langenbecks Arch Surg 390:413–420
Lee KH, Chang HC, Lo CJ (2004) Endoscope-assisted laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcers. Am Surg 70:352–356
Pescatore P, Halkic N, Calmes JM, Blum A, Gillet M (1998) Combined laparoscopic-endoscopic method using an omental plug for therapy of gastroduodenal ulcer perforation. Gastrointest Endosc 48:411–414
Costalat G, Alquier Y (1995) Combined laparoscopic and endoscopic treatment of perforated gastroduodenal ulcer using the ligamentum teres hepatis (LTH). Surg Endosc 9:677–679 discussion 680
Disclosures
Dr. Eduardo Bonin’s work is supported by an educational grant from Boston Scientific Corporation. Dr. Christopher Gostout and the Developmental Endoscopy Unit receive grant support from Olympus America and Olympus Tokyo. Dr. Gostout is an advisor to Apollo Endosurgery. Both Dr. Gostout and the Mayo Foundation maintain an equity position in Apollo Endosurgery, Inc. The support for Drs. Bonin and Gostout does not constitute a conflict of interest for this report. Ms. Andrea McConico and Drs. Juliane Bingener, Erica Moran, and Martin Zielinski have no conflicts of interest or financial ties to disclose.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bonin, E.A., Moran, E., Gostout, C.J. et al. Natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery for patients with perforated peptic ulcer. Surg Endosc 26, 1534–1538 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-011-2063-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00464-011-2063-9