Observational studySurgical laparoscopy, endoscopy & percutaneous techniques2017
Laparoscopic and Open Surgical Treatment in Gastroduodenal Perforations: Our Experience.
Observational study in Surgical laparoscopy, endoscopy & percutaneous techniques, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of trans-umbilical single-port laparoscopic surgery and laparotomy for repair of perforated peptic ulcer in pediatric patients: a retrospective study.BMC surgery · 2025Article
- Article
- Prognostic risk factors in upper gastrointestinal perforation: the role of body composition parameters.Frontiers in nutrition · 2025Article
- The Prevalence, Etiology and Treatment of Gastroduodenal Ulcers and Perforation: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- A comparative study on laparoscopic and open surgical approaches for perforated peptic ulcer repair: efficacy and outcomes analysis.Langenbeck's archives of surgery · 2023Article
- A 37-Year-Old Schizophrenic Woman With Abdominal Pain.Clinical medicine insights. Case reports · 2023Article
- Experience of management of pediatric upper gastrointestinal perforations: a series of 30 cases.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2023Article
- Evaluation of the risk factors for severe complications and surgery of intestinal foreign bodies in adults: a single-center experience with 180 cases.Gastroenterology report · 2022Article
- Duet laparoscopic repair with knotless barbed sutures for treatment of perforated peptic ulcer: reality in general surgery with lacking of manpower.Annals of translational medicine · 2021Article
- Laparoscopic and open repair for perforated duodenal ulcer: single-center experience.Wideochirurgia i inne techniki maloinwazyjne = Videosurgery and other miniinvasive techniques · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionPeptic ulcer perforation (PPU) is a common surgical emergency and the mortality rate ranges 10% to 40%, especially in elderly patients. Laparoscopic repair achieved encouraging results. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe enrolled patients performing surgical repair for PPU from January 2007 to December 2015 in our surgical unit. The aim of this retrospective observational study was to compare the results of PPU laparoscopic repair with open technique. The following characteristics of patients were evaluated: age, sex and American Society of Anesthesiologists classification. The site and the diameter of perforation were recorded: gastric, pyloric, duodenal, and the location on the anterior or posterior wall.
resultsIn total, 59 patients (39 males and 20 females) with a mean age of 58.85 years (±SD) were treated surgically. Laparoscopic repair was accomplished in 21 patients. The mean operative time for laparoscopic repair was 72 minutes (±SD), significantly shorter than open repair time (180 min ±SD). The results demonstrated that laparoscopic repair is associated with a shorter operative time, reduced postoperative pain (4.75 vs. 6.42) and analgesic requirements, a shorter hospital stay (7.5 vs. 13.1), and earlier return to normal daily activities. DISCUSSION: Laparoscopic surgery minimizes postoperative wound pain and encourages early mobilization and return to normal daily activities. The benefit of early discharge and return to work may outweigh the consumable cost incurred in the execution of laparoscopic procedures.
conclusionsComplications in both procedures are similar but laparoscopic procedure shows economic advantages for reducing postoperative hospital stay, postoperative pain, and for a good integrity of abdominal wall.
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.