ArticleWorld journal of surgery2015
The selective use of laparoscopic repair is safe in high-risk patients suffering from perforated peptic ulcer.
Article in World journal of surgery, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Laparoscopic versus open repair of perforated peptic ulcers: analysis of outcomes and identification of predictive factors of conversion.Updates in surgery · 2023Article
- Laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer: a multicenter, propensity score matching analysis.BMC surgery · 2022Article
- Comparison of laparoscopic surgery versus traditional laparotomy for the treatment of emergency patients.The Journal of international medical research · 2020Article
- Assessment of PULP score in predicting 30-day perforated duodenal ulcer morbidity, and comparison of its performance with Boey and ASA, a retrospective study.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2019Article
- A comparison of short-term outcomes between laparoscopic and open emergent repair of perforated peptic ulcers.Surgical endoscopy · 2019Article
- Laparoscopy in Acute Care Surgery: Repair of Perforated Duodenal Ulcer.Medical principles and practice : international journal of the Kuwait University, Health Science Centre · 2019Article
- Perforated Peptic Ulcer Repair: Factors Predicting Conversion in Laparoscopy and Postoperative Septic Complications.World journal of surgery · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe use of laparoscopic repair for perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) was shown to be safe and recommended in low-risk patients. However, whether the approach is safe to apply to high-risk patients is uncertain. STUDY
designThis was a retrospective study of all patients with PPU admitted between January 2002 and December 2012. The laparoscopy-first approach (LFA) was adopted as a routine for all patients. The outcomes of LFA for PPU were reviewed and assessed to determine if the approach was safe in high-risk patients.
resultsThree hundred and seventy three patients that suffered from PPU were included into the study and 50.9% received laparoscopic repair. There was a significant increase in the number of operations performed yearly by the LFA (P < 0.001). 25.2% of the patients had a Boey score of ≥2. High-risk patients that received LFA suffered from larger ulcers (P < 0.001) with more severe contamination (P = 0.006) that required conversion (P = 0.002) when compared to the low-risk patients. When compared to open surgery, more high-risk patients in the open group had ASA grade ≥3 (P = 0.007) and suffered from mortality (P = 0.001). The only significant predictor to mortality in high-risk patients was ASA grade ≥3 (P = 0.014).
conclusionsThe adoption of LFA in patients suffering from PPU was associated with acceptable rates of mortality and morbidity. The approach could also be selectively adopted in patients with Boey score ≥2 provided their ASA grading is low and hemodynamically stable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.