medigraphic.com
ISSN 1561-2945 (Print)

2013, Number 3

<< Back Next >>

Revista Cubana de Cirugía 2013; 52 (3)

Postoperative evaluation of patients operated on perforated gastro-duodenal ulcer

López RP, Pol HP, Cruz AJR, León GO, Anaya GJL

Language: Spanish
References: 22
Page: 183-193
PDF size: 143.62 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction: Perforated peptic gastroduodenal ulcer represents the most frequent and serious complication after hemorrhage. It occurred in 2 to 5 % of patients diagnosed as peptic ulcer and the main symptoms are caused by the gastroduodenal content spilled over the peritoneal cavity.
Objective: To assess the recovery of patients operated on from perforatedgastroduodenal ulcer at emergency setting.
Methods: Prospective, observational and descriptive study carried out from January 2005 through December 2011. The universe of study was all the patients operated on from perforated gastroduodenal ulcer in "Enrique Cabrera" general teaching hospital's general surgery service in this period. Data were collected in forms, which were processed and analyzed by using Microsoft Office Excel 2007. The results were provided in tables and graphs; summary statistics, absolute and relative distribution for quantitative variables and arithmetic median for the quantitative ones were the statistical techniques used.
Results: Men over 60 years old were the main group of patients with this pathology( 42.2 %). The highest incidence rate was found in males (88 %).Toxic habits like coffee plus cigar, and coffee alone were the most frequent, accounting for 23.1 % each. All the patients complained of acute epigastric pain. Chest Rx on standing position was the most used study to confirm the suspected diagnosis. Radiological pneumoperitoneum was evident in 77 % of patients. Duodenal ulcer was the main location of perforation (19 patients). Suture and epiploplasty were performed as emergency treatment in 15 patients (57.7 %). Surgical wound dehiscence was the most common complication. One patient died from bronchopneumonia during the postoperative phase.
Conclusions: Patients aged over 60 and males represented the highest number with diagnosis of perforated gastroduodenal ulcer. The most frequent location was duodenum. Epipoplasty and suture were the main therapeutic methods. Suture dehiscence was the most observed complication in this group.


REFERENCES

  1. Schirmer BD. Current status of proximal gastric vagotomy. Ann Surg. 2005;209:131-48.

  2. Debrea Wood RN. Peptic ulcer. Risks factors. 2005. [Monograph on internet]. [Accessed Jan 20, 2007]. Disponible en: http://www.nucleusinc.com

  3. Prachand VN, Klingensmith ME. Estómago. Cap. 13. En: Doherty GM, Lowney JK, Mason JE, Reznik SI, Smith MA. Washington Cirugía. 3th ed. España: Marbán Libros SL; 2005. p. 224.

  4. Hernández Gutiérrez JM, Torres Peña R, CardevillaAzoy C. Vagotomía laparoscópica de Hill-Barker frente a la convencional para la úlcera péptica del duodeno. Rev Cubana Cir. [Serie en Internet]. 2006;45(1). Disponible en: http://bvs.sld.cu/revistas/cir/vol45_1_06 /cir05106.html

  5. Lassen A, Hallas J, Schaffalitzkyo. Complicated and uncomplicated peptic ulcers in a Danish country. 1993-2002: A population-based cohort study. Am J Gastroenterol. 2006;101:945-53.

  6. Eswaran S, Roy MA. Medical manegement of acid - peptic disorders of the stomach. Surg Clin N Am. 2005;85:895-906.

  7. Schilling D, Demel A, Nusse T, Weidmannn E, Riemann F. Helicobacter pylori Infection Does not Affect the Early Rebleeding Rate in Patients with Peptic Ulcer Bleeding after Successful Endoscopic Hemostasis: A Prospective Single-Center Trial. Endoscopy. 2004;35(5):393-6.

  8. Soll AH, Sleisender y Fordtran, eds. Peptic ulcer and its complications. En: Gastrointestinal and liver diseases. Philadelphia (Pennsylvania): W.B Saunders Company; 2001. p. 670-3.

  9. Montes P, Salazar S, Monge E. Cambios en la epidemiología de la úlcera péptica y su relación con la infección con Helicobacter pylori: Hospital Daniel Alcides Carrión 2000- 2005. Rev Gastroenterol Perú. 2007;27:382-8.

  10. Cabrera F, Hidalgo M, Lorda L. Comportamiento de la úlcera gastroduodenal perforada. Revista Cubana de Medicina Militar. 2011;40(1):12-21.

  11. Cheung L, Delcore R. En: Sabiston DC; Tratado de Patología Quirúrgica. XVI ed. México. Interamericana; 2004. p. 957-98.

  12. Lunevicius R, Morkevicius M. Risk factors influencing the early outcome results after laparoscopic repair of perforated duodenal ulcer and their predictive value. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2005;390(5):413-20.

  13. Madiba TE, Nair R, Mulaudzi TV, Thomson SR. Perforated gastric ulcerreappraisal of surgical options. S Afr J Surg. 2005;43(3):58-60.

  14. Smith BR, Stabile BE. Emerging trends in peptic ulcer disease and damage control surgery in the H. pylori era.Am Surg. 2005;71(9):797-801.

  15. Flores E, Flores A. Resultados del tratamiento de la úlcera péptica perforada. Rev Cub Cir. 2008;42(2):9-17.

  16. Bejerano R. Perforación gastroduodenal por úlcera péptica: estudio de 99 pacientes operados. Rev Cub Cir. 2007;46(3):23-30.

  17. Armas B, Reyes E, García M, et al. Cirugía exerética en la úlcera péptica complicada: ¿Procedimiento extemporáneo? Rev Cub Cir. 2009;37(3):11-20

  18. Absjorn C, Bousfield R, Jhon C. Incidence of perforated and bleeding peptic ulcer before and after the introduction of H2-Receptor antagonist. Ann Surg. 2007 Jan;207:41.

  19. Schwartz S, Ashley W, Evoy D, Daly JM. Estómago. En: Schwartz I. Principios de la Cirugía. 7a ed. México DF: McGraw-Hill Interamericana; 2000. p. 1261-95.

  20. Plummer JM, McFarlane ME, Newnham. Surgical management of perforated duodenal ulcer: the changing scene. West Indian Med J. 2004; 53(6):378-81.

  21. Amarillo H, Iribarren C, Schauvinhold C, Pirchi D, Castagneto G. Cierre simple de úlcera gastroduodenal por vía laparoscópica. Rev Argent Cir. 2003;85(1-2):7-12.

  22. Chiappetto Pones L. Cirugía de Michans. 5ta. ed. Buenos Aires: El Ateneo; 1999.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com