ArticleEuropean journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society2017
Marginal ulcer perforation: a single center experience.
Article in European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Perforated marginal ulcers - what are the surgical options - simple closure or is definitive surgery needed? A case report.International journal of surgery case reports · 2026Article
- Intra-Operative Upper GI Endoscopy Helps to Identify the Gastro-Jejunostomy Perforation Site in Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass Patient.Obesity surgery · 2024Article
- Peptic ulcer disease burden, trends, and inequalities in 204 countries and territories, 1990-2019: a population-based study.Therapeutic advances in gastroenterology · 2023Article
- Perforated peptic ulcer - an update.World journal of gastrointestinal surgery · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeMarginal ulcer (MU) is defined as ulcer on the jejunal side of the gastrojejunostomy (GJ) anastomosis. Most MUs are managed medically but those with complications like bleeding or perforation require intervention. It is recommended that GJ anastomosis be revised in patients with MU perforation (MUP). The aim of this case series is to study the clinical presentation and management of MUP.
methodsThree hundred and thirty-two patients who underwent emergency surgery for perforated peptic ulcer at a single center were studied over a period of 5 years.
resultsNine patients (2.7 %) presented with MUP. GJ was previously done for either complicated peptic ulcer (n = 4) or for suspected gastric malignancy (n = 5). Two patients had previously completed H. pylori therapy. None of the patients presented with septic shock. MU was on the jejunal side of GJ in all patients. The median MUP size was 10 mm. Four patients (44.4 %) had omental patch repair, three (33.3 %) had primary closure, and one each had revision of GJ and jejunal serosal patch repair. There were no leaks, intra-abdominal abscess or reoperation and no malignancies.
conclusionMUP patients do not present with septic shock. Omental patch repair or primary closure is sufficient enough. Revision of Billroth-II-GJ into Roux-en-Y-GJ is not mandatory.
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.