Title : A comparative study of laparoscopic versus laparotomy repair of perforated peptic ulcer : A prospective study
Abstract:
Aim of the work: This study aimed to compare between laparoscopic and laparotomy repair of perforated peptic ulcer regarding intraoperative parameters, postoperative parameters and outcomes.
Patients and methods: This is a prospective study of 50 patients (males and females), of any age with perforated peptic ulcer. Those patients will be divided by random serial number method into two groups: Laparoscopic group and Open (Laparotomy) group. In a period from 15th April 2022 to 15th February 2023. Data related to patients were recorded and subjected to analysis.
Results: Operative time was significantly increased in laparoscopic versus open group (P=0.0001). While, first day pain score (VAS), opioid requirements, time of starting oral feeding, length of hospital stay and return to normal activity were highly significantly decreased in laparoscopic repair compared to open repair (p= <0.0001for each). Total post-operative complications showed insignificant deference between the studied groups (P=0.16), but they were more prevalent between open group (14 patients, 56%) versus laparoscopic group (9 patients, 36%). Good cosmetic results of wounds were more prevalent in laparoscopic group [20 patients (80.00%)] than open group [13 patients (56.52%)], but insignificant, p=0.17.
Conclusion: Laparoscopic repair had upper hand over open repair regarding less intraoperative blood loss, less postoperative pain, requiring less postoperative analgesia, early starting oral feeding, less postoperative complications, shorter hospital stay, early return to normal activity and had good cosmetic results of wounds.
