Khirurgiia · 2022
[Emergency laparoscopy in the treatment of perforated gastroduodenal ulcers].
Аннотация на английскомСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ukhanov A P, Zakharov D V, Zhilin S A, Bolshakov S V, Kochetygov D V, Leonov A I, Muminov K D, Aselderov Yu A
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare the results of endoscopic and open treatment of perforated gastroduodenal ulcers.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: There were 445 patients with perforated gastroduodenal ulcers between 2013 and 2021. Endoscopic suturing of perforation was performed in 172 patients (38.7%), 273 ones underwent open surgery.
RESULTS: Among 172 patients scheduled for endoscopy, 160 (93.6%) ones underwent laparoscopic suturing of perforation. Morbidity rate was 5.0% (n=8), postoperative mortality rate - 1.3% (n=2). Comparison of the outcomes after laparoscopic suturing of ulcers in 160 patients and open surgery in 134 patients showed that laparoscopy was followed by 2.5 times lower incidence of complications and 3 times lower postoperative mortality.
CONCLUSION: Diagnostic laparoscopy is advisable in patients with perforated ulcers and no contraindications. In most cases, surgery can be successfully and effectively completed without conversion to laparotomy. Endoscopic closure of ulcerative defect is preferable since this procedure has certain advantages over traditional intervention, contributes to significant reduction in morbidity, mortality and hospital-stay.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: There were 445 patients with perforated gastroduodenal ulcers between 2013 and 2021. Endoscopic suturing of perforation was performed in 172 patients (38.7%), 273 ones underwent open surgery.
RESULTS: Among 172 patients scheduled for endoscopy, 160 (93.6%) ones underwent laparoscopic suturing of perforation. Morbidity rate was 5.0% (n=8), postoperative mortality rate - 1.3% (n=2). Comparison of the outcomes after laparoscopic suturing of ulcers in 160 patients and open surgery in 134 patients showed that laparoscopy was followed by 2.5 times lower incidence of complications and 3 times lower postoperative mortality.
CONCLUSION: Diagnostic laparoscopy is advisable in patients with perforated ulcers and no contraindications. In most cases, surgery can be successfully and effectively completed without conversion to laparotomy. Endoscopic closure of ulcerative defect is preferable since this procedure has certain advantages over traditional intervention, contributes to significant reduction in morbidity, mortality and hospital-stay.