ArticleWorld journal of surgery2016
Perforated Peptic Ulcer Repair: Factors Predicting Conversion in Laparoscopy and Postoperative Septic Complications.
Article in World journal of surgery, 2016. 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, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) treatment: an Italian nationwide propensity score-matched cohort study investigating laparoscopic vs open approach.Surgical endoscopy · 2023Article
- Laparoscopic versus open repair of perforated peptic ulcers: analysis of outcomes and identification of predictive factors of conversion.Updates in surgery · 2023Article
- Article
- Potential use of peptic ulcer perforation (PULP) score as a conversion index of laparoscopic-perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) repair.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2022Article
- Over-the-scope-clip applications for perforated peptic ulcer.Surgical endoscopy · 2019Article
- A comparison of short-term outcomes between laparoscopic and open emergent repair of perforated peptic ulcers.Surgical endoscopy · 2019Article
- Long-term prognosis in patients continuing taking antithrombotics after peptic ulcer bleeding.World journal of gastroenterology · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe surgical treatment for perforated peptic ulcers can be safely performed laparoscopically. The aim of the study was to define simple predictive factors for conversion and septic complications.
methodsThis retrospective case-control study analyzed patients treated with either laparoscopic surgery or laparotomy for perforated peptic ulcers.
resultsA total of 71 patients were analyzed. Laparoscopically operated patients had a shorter hospital stay (13.7 vs. 15.1 days). In an intention-to-treat analysis, patients with conversion to open surgery (analyzed as subgroup from laparoscopic approach group) showed no prolonged hospital stay (15.3 days) compared to patients with a primary open approach. Complication and mortality rates were not different between the groups. The statistical analysis identified four intraoperative risk factors for conversion: Mannheim peritonitis index (MPI) > 21 (p = 0.02), generalized peritonitis (p = 0.04), adhesions, and perforations located in a region other than the duodenal anterior wall. We found seven predictive factors for septic complications: age >70 (p = 0.02), cardiopulmonary disease (p = 0.04), ASA > 3 (p = 0.002), CRP > 100 (p = 0.005), duration of symptoms >24 h (p = 0.02), MPI > 21(p = 0.008), and generalized peritonitis (p = 0.02).
conclusionOur data suggest that a primary laparoscopic approach has no disadvantages. Factors necessitating conversions emerged during the procedure inhibiting a preoperative selection. Factors suggesting imminent septic complications can be assessed preoperatively. An assessment of the proposed parameters may help optimize the management of possible septic complications.
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.