Surgical complications after open and laparoscopic surgery for perforated peptic ulcer in a nationwide cohort

Global 30-day morbidity and mortality of surgery for perforated peptic ulcer: GRACE study

BACKGROUND

There is little international data on morbidity and mortality of surgery for perforated peptic ulcer (PPU). This study aimed to understand the global 30-day morbidity and mortality of patients undergoing surgery for PPU and to identify variables associated with these.

METHOD

We performed an international study of adults (≥ 18 years) who underwent surgery for PPU from 1st January 2022 to 30th June 2022. Patients who were treated conservatively or had an underlying gastric cancer were excluded. Patients were divided into subgroups according to age (≤ 50 and > 50 years) and time from onset of symptoms to hospital presentation (≤ 24 and > 24 h). Univariate and Multivariate analyses were carried out to identify factors associated with higher 30-day morbidity and mortality.

RESULTS

 1874 patients from 159 centres across 52 countries were included. 78.3% (n = 1467) of the patients were males and the median (IQR) age was 49 years (25). Thirty-day morbidity and mortality were 48.5% (n = 910) and 9.3% (n = 174) respectively. Median (IQR) hospital stay was 7 (5) days. Open surgery was performed in 80% (n = 1505) of the cohort. Age > 50 years [(OR = 1.7, 95% CI 1.4-2), (OR = 4.7, 95% CI 3.1-7.6)], female gender [(OR = 1.8, 95% CI 1.4-2.3), (OR = 1.9, 95% CI 1.3-2.9)], shock on admission [(OR = 2.1, 95% CI 1.7-2.7), (OR = 4.8, 95% CI 3.2-7.1)], and acute kidney injury [(OR = 2.5, 95% CI 1.9-3.2), (OR = 3.9), 95% CI 2.7-5.6)] were associated with both 30-day morbidity and mortality. Delayed presentation was associated with 30-day morbidity [OR = 1.3, 95% CI 1.1-1.6], but not mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that surgery for PPU was associated with high 30-day morbidity and mortality rate. Age, female gender, and signs of shock at presentation were associated with both 30-day morbidity and mortality.

Approaches for the treatment of perforated peptic ulcers: a network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials - study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Perforated peptic ulcers are a life-threatening complication associated with high morbidity and mortality. Several treatment approaches are available. The aim of this network meta-analysis (NMA) is to compare surgical and alternative approaches for the treatment of perforated peptic ulcers regarding mortality and other patient-relevant outcomes.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A systematic literature search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Embase, CINAHL, ClinicalTrials.gov trial registry and ICTRP will be conducted with predefined search terms.To address the question of the most effective treatment approach, an NMA will be performed for each of the outcomes mentioned above. A closed network of interventions is expected. The standardised mean difference with its 95% CI will be used as the effect measure for the continuous outcomes, and the ORs with 95% CI will be calculated for the binary outcomes.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

In accordance with the nature of the data used in this meta-analysis, which involves aggregate information from previously published studies ethical approval is deemed unnecessary. Results will be disseminated directly to decision-makers (eg, surgeons, gastroenterologists) through publication in peer-reviewed journals and presentation at conferences.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42023482932.

A comparative study on laparoscopic and open surgical approaches for perforated peptic ulcer repair: efficacy and outcomes analysis

PURPOSE

This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of the clinical outcomes of laparoscopic and open sutures for peptic ulcer perforation (PPU).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for eligible studies from inception to March 31, 2023. Odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (Cl) were also calculated. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) was used to evaluate the quality of the included studies. This study was performed using the Stata (V.16.0) software.

RESULTS

A total of 29 studies involving 17,228 patients were included in this study. In terms of postoperative outcomes, the laparoscopic group had a shorter postoperative hospital stay (MD = -0.29, 95%CI = -0.44 to -0.13, P = 0.00), less blood loss (MD = -0.45, 95%CI = -0.82 to -0.08, P = 0.02), fewer wound infection (OR = 0.20, 95%CI = 0.17 to 0.24, P = 0.00), fewer pneumonia (OR = 0.59, 95%CI = 0.41 to 0.87, P = 0.01), fewer respiratory complications (OR = 0.26, 95%CI = 0.13 to 0.55, P = 0.00) and lower postoperative morbidity (OR = 0.51, 95%CI = 0.33 to 0.78, P = 0.00). The laparoscopic group had a lower mortality rate (OR = 0.36, 95%CI = 0.27 to 0.49, P = 0.00) than the open group. We also found that the laparoscopic group had a higher overall complication rate than the open group (OR = 0.45, 95%CI = 0.34 to 0.60, P = 0.00).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic repair was associated with a lower risk of mortality than open repair in patients with PPU. Laparoscopic repair may be a better option in patients with PPU.

Risk Factors for Postoperative Morbidity, Suture Insufficiency, Re-Surgery and Mortality in Patients with Gastroduodenal Perforation

(1) Background: The aim of the present study was to identify risk factors associated with postoperative morbidity, suture/anastomotic insufficiency, re-surgery, and mortality in patients undergoing surgery for gastroduodenal perforation. (2) Methods: A retrospective analysis of 273 adult patients who received surgical treatment for gastroduodenal perforation from January 2006 to June 2021 at the University Hospital Erlangen was performed. The patient demographics and preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative parameters were collected and compared among the different outcome groups (in-hospital morbidity, suture/anastomotic insufficiency, re-surgery, and 90-day mortality). (3) Results: In-hospital morbidity, suture/anastomotic insufficiency, need for re-surgery, and 90-day mortality occurred in 71%, 10%, 26%, and 25% of patients, respectively. The independent risk factors for morbidity were a significantly reduced general condition, a lower preoperative hemoglobin level, and a higher preoperative creatinine level. The independent risk factors for suture/anastomotic insufficiency could be identified as an intake of preoperative steroids and a perforation localization in the proximal stomach or duodenum. The four parameters were independent risk factors for the need for re-surgery: a significantly reduced general condition, a perforation localization in the proximal stomach, a higher preoperative creatinine level, and a higher preoperative CRP level. An age over 66 years and a higher preoperative CRP level were independent risk factors for 90-day mortality. (4) Conclusions: Our study could identify relevant risk factors for the postoperative outcome of patients undergoing surgical treatment for gastroduodenal perforation. Patients exhibiting the identified risk factors should receive heightened attention in the postoperative period and may potentially benefit from personalized and tailored therapy.

Current status of laparoscopic emergency surgery in Korea: multicenter restrospective cohort study

Purpose

Laparoscopic surgery is a choice in several emergency settings. However, there has been no nationwide study or survey that has compared the clinical use of laparoscopic emergency surgery (LES) versus open abdominal emergency surgery (OES) in Korea. Therefore, we examined the state of LES across multiple centers in Korea and further compared this data with the global state based on published reports.

Methods

Data of 2,122 patients who received abdominal emergency surgery between 2014 and 2019 in three hospitals in Korea were collected and retrospectively analyzed. Several clinical factors were investigated and analyzed.

Results

Of the patients, 1,280 (60.3%) were in the OES group and 842 (39.7%) were in the LES group. The most commonly operated organ in OES was the small bowel (25.8%), whereas that for LES was the appendix. In appendectomy and cholecystectomy, 93.7% and 88.0% were in the LES group. In small bowel surgery, gastric surgery, and large bowel surgery, 89.4%, 92.0%, and 79.1% were in the OES group. The severity-related factors of patient status demonstrated statistically significant limiting factors of selection between LES and OES.

Conclusion

Although our study has several limitations, compared to the LES data from other countries, the general LES state was similar in appendectomies, cholecystectomies, and small bowel surgeries. However, in gastric and colorectal surgeries, the LES state was different from those of other countries. This study demonstrated the LES state and limiting factors of selection between LES and OES in various operated organs. Further studies are required to analyze these differences and the various limiting factors.

Analysis of risk factors for duodenal leak after repair of a duodenal perforation

BACKGROUND

Repairing of a duodenal perforation is a well accepted procedure, but clinically, approximately 4% of patients develop duodenal leaks after perforation repair, increasing the risk of death. We retrospectively analyzed clinical data from 168 patients at our hospital to explore risk factors for duodenal leak after perforation repair and developed a nomogram for predicting postoperative duodenal leak.

METHODS

This retrospective case-control study totalled 168 patients undergoing repair of a duodenal perforation with omentopexy at the General Surgery Department, Dongnan Hospital of Xiamen University, from January 2012 to January 2022. The patients were divided into the non-leak group and the leak group. Risk factors were evaluated by analyzing the patient's sex, shock, diameter and anatomic position of the ulcer, use of NSAIDS and Glucocorticoid, history of drinking, diabetes, chronic diseases, age, time of onset of symptoms and lab tests.

RESULT

One hundred fifty-six patients (92.9%) who did not develop leaks after repair of a duodenal perforation were included in the non-leak group, and 12 (7.1%) developed leaks were included in the leak group. In univariate analysis, there were significant differences between the two groups referring to age, shock, NSAIDs, albumin, and perforation size (P < 0.05). The area under the ROC curve for perforation diameter was 0.737, the p-value was 0.006, the optimal cutoff point was 11.5, sensitivity was 58.3%, and specificity was 93.6%, the positive predictive value is 41.1%, and the negative predictive value is 98.0%. In the internal validation of the performance of the nomogram, the C-index and AUC of the model were 0.896(95%CI 0.81-0.98), demonstrating that the nomogram model was well calibrated.

CONCLUSION

The study discussed the risk factors for postoperative duodenal leak in patients undergoing repair of a duodenal perforation, and a nomogram was constructed to predict the leak. Future prospective studies with large sample sizes and multiple centres are needed to further elucidate the risk of duodenal leak after repair of a duodenal perforation.

Laparoscopic Repair Modality of Perforated Peptic Ulcer: Less Is More?

Perforation, per se, presents the most serious complication of peptic ulcer disease with a mortality rate that cannot be underestimated. Surgery is the only treatment option, which can be performed laparoscopically or via conventional laparotomy. The present study aimed to compare the short-term outcomes of laparoscopy and laparotomy techniques in the surgical treatment of peptic ulcer perforation. A retrospective study design was structured to compare the perioperative and short-term postoperative outcomes of 102 patients who had undergone laparoscopic and conventional repair of the perforated peptic ulcer over a six-year interval (January 1, 2016, to December 31, 2021). Of these, 44 (43.1%) had undergone laparoscopic repair while 58 (56.9%) had surgical repair via conventional laparotomy. The operative time and length of hospital stay were comparable in both subgroups (p=0.984 and p =0.585). Nevertheless, 30-day postoperative morbidity was significantly higher in the open surgery subgroup (75.9% vs. 59.1%, p= 0.032). The risk of relaparotomy was similar in both study subgroups; however, suture dehiscence as a reason for surgical revision was significantly more frequent in the laparoscopic subgroup (13.6% vs 3.4%). Of note, the mortality rate in the laparoscopic group of patients was 13.6%, and in the laparotomy group 41.4%. The laparoscopic approach to peptic ulcer perforation is the procedure of choice for low-risk patients. Conventional surgery seems to be associated with a significantly higher incidence of severe postoperative complications and mortality. However, the higher mortality in these patients is probably related to their worse initial clinical condition.

Surgical Management of Perforated Peptic Ulcer: A Comparative Meta-analysis of Laparoscopic Versus Open Surgery

BACKGROUND

Despite the widescale success of proton pump inhibitors to reducing the incidence of peptic ulcer disease, perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) remains a significant cause of severe complications and death. The implementation of open or surgical repair of PPU should be guided by reliable guidelines which are based on current systematic evidence.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the comparative efficacy and safety of laparoscopic and open repair of PPU.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted based on retrospective, prospective cohort studies, and randomized clinical trials. Duration of surgery and postoperative complications and death were collected from eligible studies, and the outcomes were pooled using mean differences (MD) or relative risks (RRs) for numerical and binary outcomes, respectively. The estimated variance was expressed as 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs).

RESULTS

Forty-five studies were included (8456 patients, 56.08% underwent open repair, 6 prospective studies, 7 randomized clinical trials, and 32 retrospective studies). Compared with open repair, laparoscopic surgeries were associated with longer operative times (MD=8.36, 95% CI, 0.49-16.22), shorter hospital stay (MD=-2.74, 95% CI, -3.70 to-1.79), a higher risk of suture leakage (RR=1.91, 95% CI, 1.04-3.49) and lower risks of mortality (RR=0.57, 95% CI, 0.47-0.70), septic shock (RR=0.69, 95% CI, 0.49-0.98), renal failure (RR=0.38, 95% CI, 0.18-0.79), and wound infection (RR=0.26, 95% CI, 0.19-0.37).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic repair of PPU showed promising safety outcomes; however, future well-designed randomized studies are warranted to reduce the observed performance bias and possible selection bias in individual studies.

Comparison of Omental Patch Closure Versus Simple Closure for Laparoscopic Repair of Perforated Peptic Ulcer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

AIMS

To evaluate comparative outcomes of laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer with omental patch versus without omental patch.

METHODS

A systematic search of multiple electronic data sources was conducted, and all studies comparing laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) with and without omental patch were included. Operative time, postoperative complications, re-operation and mortality were the evaluated outcome parameters for the meta-analysis. Revman 5.3 was used for data analysis.

RESULTS

Four observational studies reporting a total number of 438 patients who underwent laparoscopic repair of PPU with (n = 268) or without (n = 170) omental patch were included. Operative time was significantly shorter in no-omental patch group (NOP) when compared to omental patch group (P = .02). There was no significant difference in the risk of postoperative ileus (Odd ratio (OR) .76, P = .61), leakage (OR 1.17, P = .80), wound infection (OR 1.89, P = .34), intra-abdominal abscess (OR 1.17, P = .87), re-operation (OR .00, P = .94) and mortality (OR .55, P = .48). Moreover, length of hospital stay was comparable between the two groups (P = .81).

CONCLUSION

Laparoscopic repair of PPU with or without omental patch have comparable postoperative complications and mortality rate. However, considering the shorter operative time, no-omental patch approach is an attractive and more favourable choice. Well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed to investigate this comparison.

Risk Factors for Gastrointestinal Leak after Perforated Peptic Ulcer Disease Operative Repair

BACKGROUND

There are limited studies regarding the impact of post-operative leak on perforated peptic ulcer disease (PPUD) and conflicting results regarding routine drain placement in operative repair of PPUD. This study aims to identify risk factors for gastrointestinal leak after operative repair of PPUD to better guide intra-operative decisions about drain placement.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study at a tertiary care center from 2008 to 2019, identifying 175 patients who underwent operative repair of PPUD.

RESULTS

Patients who developed a leak (17%) were compared to patients who did not. Both hypoalbuminemia (albumin < 3.5 g/dL) (P = .03) and duodenal ulcers (P < .01) were identified as significant risk factors for leak. No significant difference was found between leak and no leak groups for AAST disease severity grade, repair technique, or pre-operative use of tobacco, alcohol, or steroids. Post-operative leaks were associated with prolonged hospital stay (29 days compared to 10, P < .01), increased complication rates (77% compared to 48%, P < .01), and increased re-operation rates (73% compared to 26%, <0.01). No difference was identified in patient characteristics or operative leak rates between patients who had drains placed at the index operation and those that did not.

DISCUSSION

Leak after operative PPUD repair is associated with significant post-operative morbidity. Hypoalbuminemia and duodenal perforations are significant risk factors for post-operative leaks.

New machine learning scoring system for predicting postoperative mortality in gastroduodenal ulcer perforation: A study using a Japanese nationwide inpatient database

BACKGROUND

Conventional prediction models for estimating risk of postoperative mortality in gastroduodenal ulcer perforation have suboptimal prediction ability. We aimed to develop and validate new machine learning models and an integer-based score for predicting the postoperative mortality.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified patients with gastroduodenal ulcer perforation who underwent surgical repair, using a nationwide Japanese inpatient database. In a derivation cohort from July 2010 to March 2016, we developed 2 machine learning-based models, Lasso and XGBoost, using 45 candidate predictors, and also developed an integer-based score for clinical use by including important variables in Lasso. In a validation cohort from April 2016 to March 2017, we measured the prediction performances of the models by computing area under the curve and comparing it to the conventional American Society of Anesthesiology risk score.

RESULTS

Of 25,886 patients, 1,176 (4.5%) died after surgical repair. For the validation cohort, Lasso and XGBoost had significantly higher prediction abilities than the American Society of Anesthesiology score (Lasso area under the curve = 0.84; 95% confidence interval 0.81-0.86; American Society of Anesthesiology score area under the curve = 0.70; 95% confidence interval 0.65-0.74, P < .001). The integer-based risk score, which had 13 factors, had a prediction ability similar to those of Lasso and XGBoost (area under the curve = 0.83; 95% confidence interval 0.81-0.86). According to the integer-based score, the mortalities were 0.1%, 2.3%, 9.3%, and 29.0% for the low (score, 0), moderate (1-2), high (3-4), and very high (≥5) score groups, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Machine learning models and the integer-based risk score performed well in predicting risk of postoperative mortality in gastroduodenal ulcer perforation. These models will help in decision making.

Surgery for Perforated Peptic Ulcer: Is Laparoscopy a New Paradigm?

Introduction

Laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) remains controversial mainly due to its safety and applicability in critically ill patients. The aim of this study is to compare the outcomes of laparoscopy versus laparotomy in the treatment of PPU.

Methods

Single-institutional, retrospective study of all patients submitted to surgical repair of PPU between 2012 and 2019.

Results

During the study period, 169 patients underwent emergent surgery for PPU. A laparoscopic approach was tried in 60 patients and completely performed in 49 of them (conversion rate 18.3%). The open group was composed of 120 patients (included 11 conversions). Comparing the laparoscopic with the open group, there were significant differences in gender (male/female ratio 7.2/1 versus 2.2/1, respectively; p=0.009) and in the presence of sepsis criteria (12.2% versus 38.3%, respectively; p=0.001), while the Boey score showed no differences between the two groups. The operative time was longer in the laparoscopic group (median 100' versus 80', p=0.01). Laparoscopy was associated with few early postoperative complications (18.4% versus 41.7%, p=0.004), mortality (2.0% versus 14.2%; p=0.02), shorter hospital stay (median 6 versus 7 days, p=0.001), and earlier oral intake (median 3 versus 4 days, p=0.021).

Conclusion

Laparoscopic repair of PPU may be considered the procedure of choice in patients without sepsis criteria if expertise and resources are available. This kind of approach is associated with a shorter length of hospital stay and earlier oral intake. In patients with sepsis criteria, more data are required to access the safety of laparoscopy in the treatment of PPU.

Clinical Characteristics of Primary Repair for Perforated Peptic Ulcer: 10-Year Experience in a Single Center

Background: Perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) is a disease whose incidence is decreasing. However, PPU still requires emergency surgery. The aim of this study was to review the clinical characteristics of patients who received primary repair for PPU and identify the predisposing factors associated with severe complications. Method: From January 2011 to December 2020, a total of 75 patients underwent primary repair for PPU in our hospital. We reviewed the patients’ data, including general characteristics and perioperative complications. Surgical complications were evaluated using the Clavien-Dindo Classification (CDC) system, with which we classified patients into the mild complication (CDC 0–III, n = 61) and severe complication (CDC IV–V, n = 14) groups. Result: Fifty patients had gastric perforation, and twenty-five patients had duodenal perforation. Among surgical complications, leakage or fistula were the most common (5/75, 6.7%), followed by wound problems (4/75, 5.3%). Of the medical complications, infection (9/75, 12%) and pulmonary disorder (7/75, 9.3%) were common. Eight patients died within thirty days after surgery (8/75, 10.7%). Liver cirrhosis was the most significant predisposing factor for severe complications (HR = 44.392, p = 0.003). Conclusion: PPU is still a surgically important disease that has significant mortality, above 10%. Liver cirrhosis is the most important underlying disease associated with severe complications.

Hospitalizations for peptic ulcer disease in China: Current features and outcomes

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Rates and outcomes of hospitalizations for peptic ulcer disease (PUD) are unknown in mainland China. We aimed to describe characteristics and treatments of PUD inpatients in secondary and tertiary care hospitals registered in the national Health Statistics and Information Reporting System in 2015 and to explore factors related to inpatient outcomes.

METHODS

We retrieved and validated PUD hospitalization data from 4441 hospitals reporting to Health Statistics and Information Reporting System in 2015. Sensitivity analyses were performed to examine the robustness of findings considering different reporting rates across provinces. Current analyses focused on ulcer sites, complications, therapies, and rates of in-hospital death or unauthorized discharge.

RESULTS

Total admissions for PUD were 443 433 (mean age 55.14 years), constituting 0.59% of all-cause hospitalizations of 2015 in 4441 hospitals. Duodenal ulcers were more common than gastric ulcers (44.69% vs 37.42%). About 61% of inpatients had complications (46.45% for bleeding and 14.66% for perforation). Over 96% of uncomplicated or bleeding inpatients were managed medically. Surgery was provided to 64.22% of perforated cases. Endoscopic hemostasis and transcatheter embolization were performed for 1.59% of the bleeding and 0.59% of the perforation cases. For all PUD cases, the average in-hospital mortality was 0.35%. Six percent of inpatients left hospitals without authorization. Multinomial logistic regressions showed that inpatient death and unauthorized discharge were associated with older age, gastric ulcer, bleeding, perforation, and comorbidity after controlling for gender, insurance status, hospital type, area, and region.

CONCLUSIONS

Currently, pharmacologic management is dominant, and endoscopic hemostasis is notably underutilized for PUD hospitalizations in mainland China.

Open Versus Laparoscopic Repair of Perforated Peptic Ulcer Disease: A Propensity-matched Study of the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare open surgery (OS) with laparoscopic surgery (LS) for perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) disease using a National dataset BACKGROUND:: PPU disease is typically treated surgically with an omental patch. This can be performed through OS or a LS. Current evidence in OS versus LS suggests equivalence in mortality and postoperative complications, but a decrease in pain and wound infections with LS.

METHODS

A one-to-one propensity score-matched analysis of patients who underwent PPU repair from December 2013 to December 2017 using data from the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit was performed. Patients with an initially laparoscopic approach were classed as LS even if converted to OS. The primary end-point was 90-day mortality; secondary endpoints were length of stay (LOS), re-operation, and re-admission to critical care. Multivariable logistic and linear models were created to compare the effect of operative approach on binary and continuous outcomes with log-rank tests for time-to-event data.

RESULTS

A total of 5253 patients underwent surgery in the study period. After propensity-matching, 2 groups of 1158 patients were created. Overall 90-day mortality was 7.5%. There was no difference between the LA and OA for 90-day mortality (7.2% vs 8.5%, OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.56-1.15, P = 0.23), median LOS (equivalent at 7 days, P = 0.09), reoperation (3.6% vs 4.0%, P = 0.74), or re-admission to critical care (2.8% vs 2.9%, P = 0.92). Across the 4-year study period LS use increased from 20% to 26% and the conversion rate decreased from 40% to 31%.

CONCLUSIONS

Short outcomes from laparoscopic PPU repair appear equivalent to open repair. There is increasing adoption of LS with decreasing conversion rates. LS for PPU appears to be an acceptable approach in this setting.

Variation in descriptors of patient characteristics in randomized clinical trials of peptic ulcer repair: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The ability to compare findings across surgical research is important. Inadequate description of participants, interventions or outcomes could lead to bias and inaccurate assessment of findings. The aim of this study was to assess consistency of description of participants using studies comparing laparoscopic and open repair of peptic ulcer as an example.

METHODS

This systematic review is reported in line with the PRISMA checklist. Searches of MEDLINE and Embase databases were performed to identify studies comparing laparoscopic and open repair of perforated peptic ulcer in adults, published in the English language. Manuscripts were dual-screened for eligibility. Full texts were retrieved and dual-screened for inclusion. Data extracted from studies included descriptors of participants in studies from tables and text. Descriptors were categorized into conceptual domains by the research team, and coverage of each domain by study was tabulated.

RESULTS

Searches identified 2018 studies. After screening, 37 full texts were retrieved and 23 studies were included in the final synthesis. A total of 76 unique descriptors were identified. These were classified into demographics (11 descriptors), vital signs (9 descriptors), disease-specific characteristics (10 descriptors), presentation and pathway factors (4 descriptors), risk factors (8 descriptors), laboratory tests (14 descriptors) and baseline health (28 descriptors). The number of descriptors in a single study ranged from three to 31. All studies reported at least one demographic descriptor. Laboratory tests was the least frequently described domain.

CONCLUSION

Study participants are described inconsistently in studies of a single example surgical condition.

Primary laparoscopic approach to repair perforated peptic ulcer. A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Perforated peptic ulcer is a serious complication of peptic ulcer disease and carries high risk for morbidity and mortality. Although the incidence of peptic ulcer disease has decreased in recent decades, the percentage of patients with perforated peptic ulcer requiring emergency surgery remains constant. The use of laparoscopic management as a first choice for the treatment of the perforation is growing but is not routine in many centers.

METHODS

Clinical and surgical data on 42 patients underwent surgical treatment for perforated peptic ulcer from January 2012 to December 2016 were collected. Laparoscopic repair of the perforation with a three-port technique was made in all cases. The Boey scoring system was used to predict the prognosis.

RESULTS

All patients underwent suture-closure of the ulcer, and omental patch through laparoscopy without conversion to open surgery. Duodenal leakages occurred in 3 patients (7.1%), then treated with a conservative approach and resolved on the 10^th postoperative day. Two patients (4.7%) had deep space infections in the first week after surgery, therefore subdiaphragmatic and pelvic abscess were drained by ultrasound guidance. Four patients (9.5%) died up to 30-day post-surgery due to progression of multisystem organ failure in absence of leakages or infections. All these patients were American Society of Anesthesiologists Classification >III and Boey Score 3.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data show that a primary laparoscopic approach in patients with peptic ulcer perforation is associated with postoperative advantages and acceptable rates of morbidity and mortality, essentially related to high Boey Score. Therefore, we suggest that the surgical repair of PPU could be always started laparoscopically.

Challenges in optimising recovery after emergency laparotomy

Standardised peri-operative care pathways for patients undergoing emergency laparotomy or laparoscopy for non-traumatic pathologies have been shown to be inadequate and associated with high morbidity and mortality. Recent research has highlighted this problem and showed that simple pathways with 'rescue' interventions have been associated with reduced mortality when implemented successfully. These rescue pathways have focused on early diagnosis and surgery, specialist surgeon and anaesthetist involvement, goal-directed therapy and intensive or intermediary postoperative care for high-risk patients. In elective surgery, enhanced recovery has resulted in reduced length of stay and morbidity by the application of procedure-specific, evidence-based interventions inside rigorously implemented patient pathways based on multidisciplinary co-operation. The focus has been on attenuation of peri-operative stress and pain management to facilitate early recovery. Patients undergoing emergency laparotomy are a heterogeneous group consisting mostly of patients with intestinal perforations and/or obstruction with varying levels of comorbidity and frailty. However, present knowledge of the different pathophysiology and peri-operative trajectory of complications in these patient groups is limited. In order to move beyond rescue pathways and to establish enhanced recovery for emergency laparotomy, it is essential that research on both the peri-operative pathophysiology of the different main patient groups - intestinal obstruction and perforation - and the potentially differentiated impact of interventions is carried out. Procedure- and pathology-specific knowledge is lacking on key elements of peri-operative care, such as: multimodal analgesia; haemodynamic optimisation and fluid management; attenuation of surgical stress; nutritional optimisation; facilitation of mobilisation; and the optimal use and organisation of specialised wards and improved interdisciplinary collaboration. As such, the future challenges in improving peri-operative patient care in emergency laparotomy are moving from simple rescue pathways to establish research that can form a basis for morbidity- and procedure-specific enhanced recovery protocols as seen in elective surgery.

Comparison of laparoscopic surgery versus traditional laparotomy for the treatment of emergency patients

Objective

To investigate the clinical efficacy of laparoscopic gastrointestinal emergency surgery and postoperative complications.

Methods

Data for 604 patients undergoing emergency gastrointestinal surgery between January 2013 and December 2018 were analyzed retrospectively. Treatment efficacy and postoperative complications were compared between 300 patients (control group) undergoing traditional laparotomy and 304 patients (observation group) undergoing laparoscopic surgery.

Results

Clinical features were significantly better in the observation group than in the control group, including duration of surgery (59.12 ± 10.31 minutes vs. 70.34 ± 12.83 minutes), intraoperative blood loss (41.21 ± 10.45 mL vs. 61.38 ± 9.97 mL), postoperative pain score (1.25 ± 0.25 points. vs. 5.13 ± 0.43 points), length of hospital stay (5.13 ± 0.24 days vs. 7.05 ± 0.13 days), and time to free activity (13 ± 2.96 hours vs. 22 ± 3.02 hours). The total complication incidence in the observation group was 3.9%, compared with 16% in the control group (16%). No significant differences in direct medical costs were recorded between the observation and control groups.

Conclusions

For patients undergoing emergency gastrointestinal surgery, laparoscopic surgery resulted in better clinical outcomes than traditional laparotomy without incurring additional costs. The potential clinical benefits of emergency laparoscopic gastrointestinal surgery warrant further study.

Laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer is not prognostic factor for 30-day mortality (a nationwide prospective cohort study)

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery has become increasingly popular in treating perforated peptic ulcer (PPU). However, currently it is not recognized as a prognostic factor for mortality within this group of patients. The aim of this study was to investigate whether laparoscopic surgery was an independent mortality risk factor in patients treated surgically for perforated peptic ulcer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a Danish nationwide cohort study based on prospectively collected data of 1008 patients treated surgically for PPU between September 2011 and December 2015. A propensity score matching analysis, considering most of the known prognostic factors for mortality and baseline characteristics, was used to adjust mortality estimates in patients treated with open and laparoscopic surgery. The primary outcome was postoperative 30-day mortality.

RESULTS

The study population comprised 1008 patients; 507 were treated laparoscopically and 501 by open surgery. There was significantly higher mean age, and higher ASA scores, as well as other mortality risk factors in the open surgery group. The unadjusted 30-day mortality was significantly lower in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery compared to open surgery (HR = 0.48, 95% CI: 0.36-0.65). After matching and weighting controls, the adjusted difference in mortality was reduced and was not significant (HR = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.59-1.15). The 30-day mortality was 13.1% for laparoscopy and 14.7% for the matched controls in the open surgery group.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to open surgery, laparoscopic surgery in patients with PPU does not reduce short term mortality. More well powered randomized clinical trials are needed to investigate the role of laparoscopic surgery in treatment of patients with PPU.

Laparoscopic versus open repair of perforated peptic ulcer: A retrospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Perforated peptic ulcer disease (PPU) is a condition subject to wide geographical variations in incidence. It remains a significant cause of morbidity and mortality, even in the era of Helicobacter pylori eradication and proton-pump inhibitor therapy. There is no clear consensus on whether laparoscopic or open approaches are superior, and with most studies in this area originating from Europe and Asia, Australian data addressing this issue are lacking.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included all patients who underwent surgery for PPU within a hospital network in Australia. Baseline variables and primary outcomes, including length of hospital stay, chest and abdominal complications, and mortality, were recorded. Secondary outcomes, including reasons for conversion, were also considered.

RESULTS

In total, 109 patients underwent operations for PPU between January 2011 and December 2015. There were no significant differences with regard to baseline comorbidities. There were no statistically significant differences in terms of median length of hospital stay or rates of chest and abdominal complications, but the operative time was 28.5 min longer (P = <0.001) in the laparoscopic group than in the open group.

CONCLUSION

Open operations were faster to perform than laparoscopic operations for repair of PPU. Despite increased experience treating many surgical diseases laparoscopically, this study did not find it to be superior in terms of length of hospital stay or complication rates.

Surgical repair of perforated peptic ulcers: laparoscopic versus open approach

INTRODUCTION

Perforated peptic ulcers are a surgical emergency that can be repaired using either laparoscopic surgery (LS) or open surgery (OS). No consensus has been reached on the comparative outcomes and safety of each approach.

METHODS

Using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS NSQIP) database, we conducted a 12-year retrospective review (2005-2016) and identified 6260 adult patients who underwent either LS (n = 616) or OS (n = 5644) to repair perforated peptic ulcers. To mitigate selection bias and adjust for the inherent heterogeneity between groups, we used propensity-score matching with a case (LS):control (OS) ratio of 1:3. We then compared intraoperative outcomes such as operative time, and 30-day postoperative outcomes including infectious and non-infectious complications, and mortality.

RESULTS

Propensity-score matching created a total of 2462 matched pairs (616 in the LS group, 1846 in the OS group). Univariate analysis demonstrated successful matching of patient characteristics and baseline clinical variables. We found that OS was associated with a shorter operative time (67.0 ± 28.6 min, OS versus 86.9 ± 57.5 min, LS; P < 0.001) but a longer hospital stay (8.6 ± 6.2 days, OS versus 7.8 ± 5.9 days, LS; P = 0.001). LS was associated with a lower rate of superficial surgical site infections (1.5%, LS versus 4.2%, OS; P = 0.032), wound dehiscence (0.3%, LS versus 1.6%, OS; P = 0.030), and mortality (3.2%, LS versus 5.4%, OS; P = 0.009).

CONCLUSION

Fewer than 10% of patients with perforated peptic ulcers underwent LS, which was associated with reduced length of stay, lower rate of superficial surgical site infections, wound dehiscence, and mortality. Given our results, a greater emphasis should be provided to a minimally invasive approach for the surgical repair of perforated peptic ulcers.

Patients With Perforated Peptic Ulcers: Risk Factors for Morbidity and Mortality

Perforated peptic ulcers continue to be an important problem in surgical practice. In this study, risk factors for peptic ulcer perforation-associated mortality and morbidity were evaluated. This is a retrospective study of patients surgically treated for perforated peptic ulcer over a decade (March 1999–December 2014). Patient age, sex, complaints at presentation, time lapse between onset of complaints and presentation to the hospital, physical findings, comorbidities, laboratory and imaging findings, length of hospitalization, morbidity, and mortality were recorded. The Mannheim peritonitis index (MPI) and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score were calculated and recorded for each patient on admission to the hospital. Of the 149 patients, mean age was 50.6 ± 19 years (range: 17–86). Of these, 129 (86.5%) were males and 20 (13.4%) females. At least 1 comorbidity was found in 42 (28.1%) of the patients. Complications developed in 36 (24.1%) of the patients during the postoperative period. The most frequent complication was wound site infection. There was mortality in 26 (17.4%) patients and the most frequent cause of mortality was sepsis. Variables that were found to have statistically significant effects on morbidity included age older than 60 years, presence of comorbidities, and MPI (P = 0.029, 0.013, and 0.013, respectively). In a multivariate analysis, age older than 60 years, presence of comorbidities, and MPI were independent risk factors that affected morbidity. In the multivariate logistic regression analysis, age older than 60 years [P = 0.006, odds ratio (OR) = 5.99, confidence interval (CI) = 0.95] and comorbidities (OR = 2.73, CI = 0.95) were independent risk factors that affected morbidity. MPI and APACHE II scoring were both predictive of mortality. Age older than 60, presentation time, and MPI were independent risk factors for mortality. Undelayed diagnosis and appropriate treatment are of the utmost importance when presenting with a perforated peptic ulcer. We believe close observation of high-risk patients during the postoperative period may decrease morbidity and mortality rates.

Short-term outcomes after emergency surgery for complicated peptic ulcer disease from the UK National Emergency Laparotomy Audit: a cohort study

OBJECTIVES

This study used national audit data to describe current management and outcomes of patients undergoing surgery for complications of peptic ulcer disease (PUD), including perforation and bleeding. It was also planned to explore factors associated with fatal outcome after surgery for perforated ulcers. These analyses were designed to provide a thorough understanding of current practice and identify potentially modifiable factors associated with outcome as targets for future quality improvement.

DESIGN

National cohort study using National Emergency Laparotomy Audit (NELA) data.

SETTING

English and Welsh hospitals within the National Health Service.

PARTICIPANTS

Adult patients admitted as an emergency with perforated or bleeding PUD between December 2013 and November 2015.

INTERVENTIONS

Laparotomy for bleeding or perforated peptic ulcer.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was 60-day in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included length of postoperative stay, readmission and reoperation rate.

RESULTS

2444 and 382 procedures were performed for perforated and bleeding ulcers, respectively. In-hospital 60-day mortality rates were 287/2444 (11.7%, 95% CI 10.5% to 13.1%) for perforations, and 68/382 (17.8%, 95% CI 14.1% to 22.0%) for bleeding. Median (IQR) 2-year institutional volume was 12 (7-17) and 2 (1-3) for perforation and bleeding, respectively. In the exploratory analysis, age, American Society of Anesthesiology score and preoperative systolic blood pressure were associated with mortality, with no association with time from admission to operation, surgeon grade or operative approach.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing surgery for complicated PUD face a high 60-day mortality risk. Exploratory analyses suggested fatal outcome was primarily associated with patient rather than provider care factors. Therefore, it may be challenging to reduce mortality rates further. NELA data provide important benchmarking for patient consent and has highlighted low institutional volume and high mortality rates after surgery for bleeding peptic ulcers as a target for future research and improvement.

Perforated peptic ulcer - an update

Peptic ulcer disease (PUD) affects 4 million people worldwide annually. The incidence of PUD has been estimated at around 1.5% to 3%. Perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) is a serious complication of PUD and patients with PPU often present with acute abdomen that carries high risk for morbidity and mortality. The lifetime prevalence of perforation in patients with PUD is about 5%. PPU carries a mortality ranging from 1.3% to 20%. Thirty-day mortality rate reaching 20% and 90-d mortality rate of up to 30% have been reported. In this review we have summarized the current evidence on PPU to update readers. This literature review includes the most updated information such as common causes, clinical features, diagnostic methods, non-operative and operative management, post-operative complications and different scoring systems of PPU. With the advancement of medical technology, PUD can now be treated with medications instead of elective surgery. The classic triad of sudden onset of abdominal pain, tachycardia and abdominal rigidity is the hallmark of PPU. Erect chest radiograph may miss 15% of cases with air under the diaphragm in patients with bowel perforation. Early diagnosis, prompt resuscitation and urgent surgical intervention are essential to improve outcomes. Exploratory laparotomy and omental patch repair remains the gold standard. Laparoscopic surgery should be considered when expertise is available. Gastrectomy is recommended in patients with large or malignant ulcer.

Risk factors for reintervention after surgery for perforated gastroduodenal ulcer

Background

Perforated gastroduodenal ulcer carries a high mortality rate. Need for reintervention after surgical repair is associated with worse outcome, but knowledge on risk factors for reintervention is limited. The aim was to identify prognostic risk factors for reintervention after perforated gastroduodenal ulcer in a nationwide cohort.

Methods

All patients treated surgically for perforated gastroduodenal ulcer in Denmark between 2003 and 2014 were included using data from the Danish Clinical Register of Emergency Surgery. Potential risk factors for reintervention were assessed, and their crude and adjusted associations calculated by the competing risks subdistribution hazards approach.

Results

A total of 4086 patients underwent surgery for perforated gastroduodenal ulcer during the study interval. Median age was 71·1 (i.q.r. 59·6–81·0) years and the overall 90-day mortality rate was 30·8 per cent (1258 of 4086). Independent risk factors for reintervention were: male sex (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1·46, 95 per cent c.i. 1·20 to 1·78), in-hospital perforation (adjusted HR 1·36, 1·11 to 1·68), high BMI (adjusted HR 1·49, 1·10 to 2·01), high ASA physical status grade (adjusted HR 1·54, 1·23 to 1·94), shock on admission (adjusted HR 1·40, 1·13 to 1·74), surgical delay (adjusted HR 1·07, 1·02 to 1·14) and other co-morbidity (adjusted HR 1·24, 1·02 to 1·51). Preadmission use of steroids (adjusted HR 0·59, 0·41 to 0·84) and age above 70 years (adjusted HR 0·72, 0·59 to 0·89) were associated with a reduced risk of reoperation.

Conclusion

Obese men with coexisting diseases and high disease severity who have surgery for gastroduodenal perforation are at increased risk of reoperation.

Laparoscopic versus open repair for perforated peptic ulcer: A meta analysis of randomized controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

The role of laparoscopic surgery in the repair for peptic ulcer disease is unclear. The present study aimed to compare the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic versus open repair for peptic ulcer disease.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing laparoscopic versus open repair for peptic ulcer disease were identified from MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and references of identified articles and relevant reviews. Primary outcomes were postoperative complications, mortality, and reoperation. Secondary outcomes were operative time, postoperative pain, postoperative hospital stay, nasogastric tube duration, and time to resume diet. Statistical analysis was carried out by Review Manage software.

RESULTS

Five RCTs investigating a total of 549 patients, of whom, 279 received laparoscopic repair and 270 received open repair, were included in the final analysis. There were no significant differences between these two procedures in some primary outcomes including overal postoperative complication rate, mortality, and reoperation rate. Subcategory analysis of postoperative complications showed that laparoscopic repair had also similar rates of repair site leakage, intra-abdominal abscess, postoperative ileus, pneumonia, and urinary tract infection as open surgery, except of the lower surgical site infection rate (P < 0.05). In addition, there were also no significant differences between these two procedures in some second outcomes including operative time, postoperative hospital stay, and time to resume diet, but laparoscopic repair had shorter nasogastric tube duration (P < 0.05) and less postoperative pain (P < 0.05) than open surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Laparoscopic surgery is comparable with open surgery in the setting of repair for perforated peptic ulcer. The obvious advantages of laparoscopic surgery are the lower surgical site infection rate, shorter nasogastric tube duration and less postoperative pain. However, more higher quality studies should be undertaken to further assess the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic repair for peptic ulcer disease.

Perforated peptic ulcer

Perforated peptic ulcer is a common emergency condition worldwide, with associated mortality rates of up to 30%. A scarcity of high-quality studies about the condition limits the knowledge base for clinical decision making, but a few published randomised trials are available. Although Helicobacter pylori and use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are common causes, demographic differences in age, sex, perforation location, and underlying causes exist between countries, and mortality rates also vary. Clinical prediction rules are used, but accuracy varies with study population. Early surgery, either by laparoscopic or open repair, and proper sepsis management are essential for good outcome. Selected patients can be managed non-operatively or with novel endoscopic approaches, but validation of such methods in trials is needed. Quality of care, sepsis care bundles, and postoperative monitoring need further assessment. Adequate trials with low risk of bias are urgently needed to provide better evidence. We summarise the evidence for perforated peptic ulcer management and identify directions for future clinical research.

Technique to manage persistent leak from a prepyloric ulcer where a distal gastrectomy is not appropriate

Perforated peptic ulcer disease remains a relatively frequent emergency surgery presentation. Persistent leak is the most common indication for return to theatre. We present a technique to manage patients in whom a more substantial resection is not possible. A 45-year-old woman underwent initial laparoscopic primary closure of a non-malignant perforated gastric ulcer. This subsequently leaked on return to the UK and had a further graham patch formed via a laparotomy. Unfortunately, the patch repair leaked and at reoperation a wedge excision or distal gastrectomy was not possible given the friability of the tissues and instability of the patient, a transgastric drain and perigastric drain were therefore placed. This created a controlled fistula, which was managed eventually as an outpatient. Transgastric drains in the context of the persistent perforated gastric ulcer leak are a safe way to manage the unstable patient with poor tissues where more substantial surgeries such as a distal gastrectomy are not possible.