Laparoscopic closure of perforated duodenal ulcer

Background: Medical treatment of peptic ulcer is highly successful, and the eradication of Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) reduces ulcer recurrence. However, the incidence of perforated duodenal ulcer and its associated mortality have not been reduced by modern methods of therapy. Laparoscopic simple closure and omental plug by suturing, fibrin glue, and stapler have been successful. Methods: Over a 1-year period (1996–97), 21 patients with perforated duodenal ulcer were operated on in our hospital by laparoscopic simple closure and omental patch. The mean age was 36.4 ± 11.8 years (range, 18–61). Twenty patients were male (93.7%). The mean duration of pain was 9.1 ± 11.7 hs (range, 2–48). Three patients had a previous history of duodenal ulcer (14.3%), and another three (14.3%) patients had a history of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug (NSAID) intake. Erect chest radiograph showed that 19 patients had air under the diaphragm (90.5%). Sixteen patients (76.2%) had frank pus in the abdomen, and five patients had a minimal peritoneal reaction (23.8%). Results: The mean operative time was 71.6 ± 24.6 mins (range, 40–120), and the mean hospital stay was 5.2 ± 1.6 days (range, 3–9). The mean time to resume oral fluids was 3.1 ± 0.8 days (range, 2–4). Only one patient was reoperated due to leakage identified by gastrographin swallow. Conclusions: This procedure is safe and efficient; however, further study of its long-term effectiveness and comparability to existing therapy is still needed. Received: 28 May 1998/Accepted: 17 November 1998     

Laparoscopic treatment of gastroduodenal perforations: comparison with conventional surgery

Background Laparoscopic techniques have been proposed as an alternative to open surgery for the treatment of peptic ulcer perforation. This study compared the outcome of laparoscopic and open approaches for the repair of gastroduodenal perforations. Methods A retrospective review was conducted with 134 consecutive patients treated for gastroduodenal perforations. These patients included 122 with perforated duodenal ulcers, 10 with perforated gastric ulcers, and 2 with iatrogenic duodenal perforations. Whereas 68 patients were treated laparoscopically, 66 patients underwent conventional (open) surgery. Results Laparoscopic repair was successful in 65 cases (96 %). The mean operating time was shorter with the laparoscopic technique (68 vs 59 min), but the difference was not significant. The duration of postoperative nasogastric aspiration and time to resumed oral intake were shorter in the laparoscopic group (2.6 vs 4.1 days and 4.4 vs. 5.2 days, respectively; p = 0.043). The postoperative analgetic requirements, and overall complications rate were significantly lower after laparoscopic surgery (p = 0.03 and p = 0.004, respectively). There was no statistically significant difference in hospital stay (5.1 vs 6.1 days) or mortality rate between the two procedures. Conclusion Laparoscopic repair of gastroduodenal perforations is a safe alternative treatment offering certain significant short-term advantages. The preliminary results were presented at the 1st European Endoscopic Surgery Week, 15–18 June 2003, Glasgow, Scotland     

Comparison between laparoscopic and conventional omental patch repair for perforated duodenal ulcer

Background: The aim of the study is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic omental patch repair. Method: This is a retrospective review of 53 consecutive patients with omental patch repair for perforated duodenal ulcer; 38 underwent conventional open approach and 15 underwent laparoscopic patch repair. The only selection criterion was availability of expertise for laparoscopic repair on the day of admission. By chance, the open group had poorer ASA scores. There were four deaths and five postoperative complications in the open group. Results: Laparoscopic repair was successful in 14 cases with one postoperative complication. Operative time was longer in the laparoscopic group (80 vs 65 min in open group, p= 0.02). Patients required less postoperative analgesics in the laparoscopic group (median amount of pethidine was 75 mg vs 175 mg in the open group, p= 0.03). There was no statistically significant difference in terms of hospital stay and return to normal activities between the two procedures. Follow-up Visick scores were comparable in both groups. Conclusions: Laparoscopic omental patch repair offers a safe alternative to the conventional method and causes less postoperative pain. Received: 29 December 1995/Accepted: 3 May 1996     

Predicting mortality and morbidity of patients operated on for perforated peptic ulcers

HYPOTHESIS: Since the early 1990s, the laparoscopic technique has been increasingly used for the treatment of perforated peptic ulcer. It is important to validate a risk scoring system that can stratify patients into various risk groups before comparing the treatment outcome of laparoscopic repair against that of conventional open surgery. The scoring system should be able to predict the likelihood of mortality and morbidity. Boey score and APACHE II (Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II) score may be of use in patient stratification. DESIGN: Retrospective review of relevant case notes by one reviewer. SETTING: A teaching hospital treating 0. 5 million to 1 million patients during the study period. PATIENTS: Patients operated on for perforated peptic ulcer between January 1989 and December 1998. Patients treated conservatively were excluded. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mortality and postoperative complications (morbidity). RESULTS: A total of 436 patients (365 male and 71 female) with a mean +/- SD age of 51.5 +/- 18.3 years (range, 14-92 years) were studied. Duodenal perforation accounted for 344 (78.9%) of 436 cases. The mortality rate was 7.8% (34/436), and 89 patients had postoperative complications. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that only the APACHE II score predicted both mortality and morbidity. Although the Boey score predicted mortality, it failed to predict morbidity. However, the Boey score predicted the chance of conversion in patients undergoing laparoscopic repair. CONCLUSIONS: The APACHE II score may be a useful tool for stratifying patients into various risk groups, and the Boey score might select appropriate patients for laparoscopic repair.     

Enhanced postoperative recovery pathways in emergency surgery: a randomised controlled clinical trial

Background

Enhanced recovery pathways are now widely used in elective surgical procedures. The feasibility of enhanced postoperative recovery pathways in emergency surgery for perforated peptic ulcer disease was investigated in this randomized controlled clinical trial.

Methods

Patients with perforated peptic ulcer disease who underwent laparoscopic repair were randomized into 2 groups. Group 1 patients were managed with standard postoperative care and group 2 patients with enhanced postoperative recovery pathways. The primary endpoints were the length of hospital stay and morbidity and mortality.

Results

Forty-seven patients were included in the study. There were 26 patients in group 1 and 21 in group 2. There were no significant differences in the morbidity and mortality rates, whereas the length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in group 2.

Conclusions

The application of enhanced postoperative recovery pathways in selected patients with perforated peptic ulcer disease who undergo laparoscopic Graham patch repair seems feasible.     

Laparoscopic vs open repair of gastric perforation and abdominal lavage of associated peritonitis in pigs

Background: Laparoscopy is increasingly used in conditions complicated by peritonitis, e.g., peptic ulcer perforation. Of some theoretical concern is the capnoperitoneum, which may aggravate peritonitis and induce septic shock due to increased intraabdominal pressure and distension of the peritoneum. This animal study was devised to analyze the effectiveness of laparoscopic versus traditional open repair of gastric perforation and abdominal lavage for associated peritonitis. Methods: To simulate gastric perforation, female Duroc pigs were subjects to standardized gastrotomy. Either 6 or 12 h after gastric perforation, the animals underwent either traditional open or laparoscopic repair of the gastric defect and peritoneal lavage. The subjects were divided into the following four groups: peritonitis for 6 h and open surgery (group I) or laparoscopic surgery (group II); peritonitis for 12 h and open surgery (group III) or laparoscopic surgery (group IV). After an observation period of 6 days, the surviving animals were killed. The main outcome criteria were survival, perioperative changes of hemodynamics suggestive for septic shock, bacteremia, and endotoxemia. Results: There were no significant differences between group I and II. Mortality was 22% in group III, as compared to 78% in group IV (p= 0.045). In group IV, the incidence of perioperative bacteremia and plasma endotoxin concentrations were significantly higher than in group III. Concomitantly, decreased mean arterial pressure and systemic vascular resistance, and increased cardiac output suggested a higher incidence of septic shock in group IV. Conclusion: Critical appraisal of laparoscopic surgery is warranted in conditions associated with severe, longstanding peritonitis. Received: 28 February 1997/Accepted: 1 July 1997     

Laparoscopic repair of peptic ulcer perforation without omental patch versus conventional open repair

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic surgery, a minimally invasive technique, has recently begun to be used on perforated peptic ulcers effectively and frequently. Nevertheless, most studies have shown that the disadvantages of the laparoscopic treatment of peptic ulcers are a long operation time, a high reoperation rate, and a need for an experienced surgeon. Thus, the objective of the current study was to compare the safety and efficacy of optimized laparoscopic surgery without an omental patch for a perforated peptic ulcer within a shorter operational time with conventional open surgery in a 4-year period. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From May 2002 to June 2006, 35 consecutive patients with a clinical diagnosis of a perforated peptic ulcer were prepared prospectively to undergo either an open or optimized laparoscopic surgery. RESULTS: Seventeen patients with a perforated peptic ulcer underwent simple laparoscopic repair without an omental patch. Three patients (17.6%) who were begun by the laparoscopic approach had to be converted to open surgery. Eighteen patients underwent conventional open surgery. The mean operative time for laparoscopic repair was 42.10 minutes (range, 35-60), which was significantly shorter than the 55.83 minutes for open repair (range, 35-72; P = 0.001). Postoperative parenteral analgesic requirements were lower after laparoscopic repair (75.0 mg) than that after an open repair procedure (101.39 mg; P = 0.02). There was no statistically significant difference between the procedures in terms of hospital stay (5 vs. 5.33 days; P = 0.37) and the timing of access to normal daily activity (6.8 vs. 7.1 days) (P = 0.54). CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic surgery, when optimized by a simple repair without an omental patch and 10 mm of a large-channel aspirator-irrigator, may be safely and effectively applied to the patients with small duodenal perforated peptic ulcers (<10 mm) and because of its having low risk factors. The procedure may be an alternative treatment to other procedures when in experienced hands.     

Laparoscopic gastro- and hepaticojejunostomy for palliation of pancreatic cancer

Background: Most patients presenting with pancreatic cancer are irresectable at the time the diagnosis is made. Therefore, they are in need of palliative treatment that can guarantee minimal morbidity, mortality, and hospital stay. To address this need, we designed a study to test the feasibility of laparoscopic gastroenterostomy and hepaticojejunostomy and to compare their results with those achieved with open techniques. Methods: We performed a case control study of a new concept in laparoscopic palliation based on the findings of preoperative imaging and diagnostic laparoscopy. Laparoscopic side-to-side gastroenterostomy and end-to-side hepaticojejunostomy (Roux-en-Y) were done in irresectable cases. Of 14 patients who underwent laparoscopic palliation, three had a laparoscopic double bypass, seven had a gastroenterostomy, and four underwent staging laparoscopy only. The results were compared with a population of 14 matched patients who had conventional palliative procedures. Results: Postoperative morbidity was 7% vs 43% for laparoscopic and open palliation, respectively (p < 0.05). There were no mortalities in the laparoscopic group, as compared to 29% in the group who had open bypass surgery (p < 0.05). Postoperative hospital stay averaged 9 days in the laparoscopic group and 21 days in the open group (p < 0.06). Operating time tended to be shorter in the laparoscopic group (p < 0.25). Morphine derivatives were necessary for a significantly shorter period after laparoscopic surgery (p < 0.03). Conclusions: Our preliminary experience strongly suggests that laparoscopic palliation can reduce the three major drawbacks of open bypass surgery—i.e., high morbidity, high mortality, and long hospital stay. Received: 24 February 1999/Accepted: 13 May 1999     

Laparoscopic vs open inguinal hernia repair

Background: The role of laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair is controversial. The aim of this study was to find out whether it is justified to switch from the predominantly modified Bassini repair which the authors had been using to laparoscopic repair. Methods: Randomized controlled trial in 120 eligible patients admitted for elective hernia repair in a university hospital. Results: Sixty patients underwent laparoscopic transabdominal preperitoneal mesh repair; the other 60 patients had an open repair, mostly with the modified Bassini technique. Operative time for laparoscopic repair was significantly longer, mean (s.d.) 95 (28) min vs 67 (27) min (p < 0.001). The mean analogue pain score during the first 24 h after surgery was 36.2 (20.2) in the laparoscopic group and 49.3 (24.9) in the open group (p= 0.006). The requirement for narcotic injections and postoperative disability in walking 10 m and getting out of bed were also significantly less following laparoscopic repair. The postoperative hospital stay was not significantly different, mean 2.6 (1.2) days for laparoscopic repair and 3.0 (1.5) days for open repair (p= 0.1). Patients were able to perform light activities without pain or discomfort sooner after laparoscopic repair, median interquartile range 8 (5–14) days vs 14 (8–19) days (p= 0.013). Patients also resumed heavy activities sooner, but not significantly, after laparoscopic repair, median 28 (17–60) days vs 35 (20–56) days (p= 0.25). The return to work was not significantly different, median 14 (8–25) days after laparoscopic repair and 15 (11–21) days after open repair (p= 0.14). After a mean follow-up of 32 months one patient developed a recurrent hernia 3 months after a laparoscopic repair. Laparoscopic repair was more costly than open repair by approximately $400. Conclusions. Laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair was associated with less early postoperative pain and disability and earlier return to full activities than open repair, but there were no benefits regarding postoperative hospital stay and return to work; laparoscopic repair was also more costly. Received: 23 May 1997/Accepted: 1 August 1997     

Iatrogenic thoracic migration of the stomach complicating laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication

Background: Intrathoracic gastric herniation after laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication is an uncommon but potentially life-threatening complication that may present in the early or late postoperative period. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on all patients undergoing antireflux surgery from December 1991 to June 1999. Results: Nine cases of gastric herniation occurred after 511 operations (0.17%). Patients presented with the condition 4 days to 29 months after surgery. Eight of these nine patients (89%) had reported vomiting in the immediate postoperative period. Seven patients (78%) reported persistent odynophagia. A factor common to all patients was that posterior crural repair had not been performed. Conclusions: Measures should be undertaken to prevent postoperative vomiting after laparoscopic Nissen fundoplication. Posterior crural repair is essential after surgery in all cases. Received: 12 July 1999/Accepted: 22 November 1999/Online publication: 8 May 2000     

Comparison Between Open and Laparoscopic Repair of Perforated Peptic Ulcer Disease

Background  The place of laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer followed by peritoneal toilet has been established, although it is not routinely practiced. This prospective study compared laparoscopic and open repair of perforated peptic ulcer disease. We evaluated whether the early results from laparoscopic repair resulted in improved patient outcome compared with conventional open repair. Methods  All patients who underwent repair of perforated peptic ulcer disease during a 12-month period in our unit were included in the study. The primary end points that were evaluated were total operative time, nasogastric tube utilisation, intravenous fluid requirement, total time of urinary catheter and abdominal drainage usage, time taken to return to normal diet, intravenous/intramuscular opiate use, time to full mobilization, and total in-patient hospital stay. Results  Thirty-three patients underwent surgical repair of perforated peptic ulcer disease (19 laparoscopic repairs and 14 open repairs; mean age, 54.2 (range, 32–82) years). There was no increase in total operative time in patients who had undergone laparoscopic repair (mean: 61 minutes laparoscopic versus 57 minutes open). There was significantly less requirement for intravenous/intramuscular opiate analgesia in patients who had undergone laparoscopic repair (mean time to oral analgesia: 1.2 days laparoscopic versus 3.8 days open). In addition there was a significant decrease in the time that the nasogastric tube (mean: 2.1 days laparoscopic versus 3.1 days open), urinary catheter (mean: 2.3 days laparoscopic versus 3.7 days open) and abdominal drain (mean: 2.2 days laparoscopic versus 3.8 days open) were required during the postoperative period. Patients who had undergone laparoscopic repair required less intravenous fluids (mean: 1.4 days laparoscopic versus 3.1 days open) and returned to normal diet (mean: 2.3 days laparoscopic versus 4.8 days open) and full mobilization significantly earlier than those who had undergone open repair (mean: 2.3 days laparoscopic versus 3.3 days open). In addition, patients who had undergone laparoscopic repair required a shorter in-patient hospital stay (mean: 3.1 days laparoscopic versus 4.3 days open). Conclusions  Laparoscopic repair is a viable and safe surgical option for patients with perforated peptic ulcer disease and should be considered for all patients, providing that the necessary expertise is available.     

A randomized study comparing laparoscopic versus open repair of perforated peptic ulcer using suture or sutureless technique.

OBJECTIVE: This study compares laparoscopic versus open repair and suture versus sutureless repair of perforated duodenal and juxtapyloric ulcers. BACKGROUND DATA: The place of laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer followed by peritoneal toilet of the peritoneal cavity has been established. Whether repair of the perforated peptic ulcer by the laparoscopic approach is better than conventional open repair and whether sutured repair is better than sutureless repair are both undetermined. METHODS: One hundred three patients were randomly allocated to laparoscopic suture repair, laparoscopic sutureless repair, open suture repair, and open sutureless repair. RESULTS: Laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer (groups 1 and 2) took significantly longer than open repair (groups 3 and 4; 94.3 +/ 40.3 vs. 53.7 +/ 42.6 minutes: Student's test, p < 0.001), but the amount of analgesic required after laparoscopic repair was significantly less than in open surgery (median 1 dose vs. 3 doses) (Mann-Whitney U test, p = 0.03). There was no significant difference in the four groups of patients in terms of duration of nasogastric aspiration, duration of intravenous drip, total hospital stay, time to resume normal diet, visual analogue scale score for pain in the first 24 hours after surgery, morbidity, reoperation, and mortality rates. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer is a viable option. Sutureless repair is as safe as suture repair and it takes less time to perform.     

Laparoscopic omental patch repair for perforated peptic ulcer.

OBJECTIVE: The authors' initial experience with laparoscopic omental patch repair for perforated peptic ulcer is documented. Its results are compared with those of other procedures and follow-up study is reviewed. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Since the advent of H2-antagonists, the usefulness of simple closure of a perforated peptic ulcer is increasing, and improvements in laparoscopic surgery have made possible minimally invasive surgery for perforated ulcer. METHODS: From December 1992 to February 1994, laparoscopic omental patch repair followed by use of H2-antagonists was performed successfully in 11 patients. Fifty-five patients underwent other surgical procedures for perforated peptic ulcers (conventional open omental patch: 4, selective vagotomy in combination with antrectomy: 24, distal gastrectomy: 27). RESULTS: The average operation time was 135 minutes. Administration of postoperative pain medication was reduced remarkably (0.9 times per patient), and all patients recovered rapidly. No serious postoperative complications were recorded. After a mean period of 11 months, the postoperative evaluation was satisfactory for all patients, and no ulcer recurrence was found. CONCLUSIONS: In perforated peptic ulcer disease, laparoscopic omental patch repair offers a number of advantages. Because no upper abdominal incision is made, there is decreased postoperative pain, and the patient rapidly recovers with fewer and less severe complications. Although the procedure requires a surgeon with particular expertise in endoscopic suturing technique, surgeons familiar with laparoscopic cholecystectomy can readily perform it after some practice. The authors' preliminary experience suggests that this is a minimally invasive procedure for perforated peptic ulcer that offers an attractive alternative to open surgery.     

Laparoscopic repair for perforated peptic ulcer: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE: To compare the results of open versus laparoscopic repair for perforated peptic ulcers. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Omental patch repair with peritoneal lavage is the mainstay of treatment for perforated peptic ulcers in many institutions. Laparoscopic repair has been used to treat perforated peptic ulcers since 1990, but few randomized studies have been carried out to compare open versus laparoscopic procedures. METHODS: From January 1994 to June 1997, 130 patients with a clinical diagnosis of perforated peptic ulcer were randomly assigned to undergo either open or laparoscopic omental patch repair. Patients were excluded for a history of upper abdominal surgery, concomitant evidence of bleeding from the ulcer, or gastric outlet obstruction. Patients with clinically sealed-off perforations without signs of peritonitis or sepsis were treated without surgery. Laparoscopic repair would be converted to an open procedure for technical difficulties, nonjuxtapyloric gastric ulcers, or perforations larger than 10 mm. A Gastrografin meal was performed 48 to 72 hours after surgery to document sealing of the perforation. The primary end-point was perioperative parenteral analgesic requirement. Secondary endpoints were operative time, postoperative pain score, length of postoperative hospital stay, complications and deaths, and the date of return to normal daily activities. RESULTS: Nine patients with a surgical diagnosis other than perforated peptic ulcer were excluded; 121 patients entered the final analysis. There were 98 male and 23 female patients recruited, ages 16 to 89 years. The two groups were comparable in age, sex, site and size of perforations, and American Society of Anesthesiology classification. There were nine conversions in the laparoscopic group. After surgery, patients in the laparoscopic group required significantly less parenteral analgesics than those who underwent open repair, and the visual analog pain scores in days 1 and 3 after surgery were significantly lower in the laparoscopic group as well. Laparoscopic repair required significantly less time to complete than open repair. The median postoperative stay was 6 days in the laparoscopic group versus 7 days in the open group. There were fewer chest infections in the laparoscopic group. There were two intraabdominal collections in the laparoscopic group. One patient in the laparoscopic group and three patients in the open group died after surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer is a safe and reliable procedure. It was associated with a shorter operating time, less postoperative pain, reduced chest complications, a shorter postoperative hospital stay, and earlier return to normal daily activities than the conventional open repair.     

Early laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis

Background: The timing of laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis remains controversial. Methods: One hundred ninety-four patients with acute cholecystitis were reviewed. The conversion rates for the various number of days of symptoms before surgery were analyzed. The conversion rate dramatically increased from 3.6% for those patients with 4 days of symptoms to 26% for those patients with 5 days of symptoms. The mean number of days of symptoms prior to surgery in those patients who underwent successful laparoscopic cholecystectomy was 4.1 as compared to 8.0 in those patients who required open cholecystectomy (p < 0.0001). Based on this data the patients were divided into two groups. Group 1 consisted of 109 patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy within 4 days of onset of symptoms and group 2 consisted of 85 patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy after more than 4 days following onset of symptoms. Results: The conversion rate from laparoscopic to open cholecystectomy was 15%. The conversion rate for group 1 was 1.8% as compared to 31.7% for group 2 (p < 0.0001). Indications for conversion were inability to identify the anatomy secondary to inflammatory adhesions (68%), cholecystoduodenal fistula (18%), and bleeding (14%). The major complication rate for group 1 was 2.7% as compared to 13% for group 2 (p= 0.007). The mortality rate for all patients with attempted laparoscopic cholecystectomy for acute cholecystitis was 1.5%. The average procedure time for group 1 was 100 ± 37 min vs 120 ± 55 min in group 2. The average number of postoperative hospital days in group 1 was 5.5 ± 2.7 days as compared to 10.8 ± 2.7 days in group 2. Conclusions: We advocate early laparoscopic cholecystectomy within 4 days of onset of symptoms to decrease major complications and conversion rates. This decreased conversion rate results in decreased length of procedure and hospital stay. Received: 28 March 1996/Accepted: 12 September 1996     

Laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer: a meta-analysis

Background Laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer has been gaining popularity in recent years, but few data exist to support the superiority of the laparoscopic approach over open repair. The objective of the current study was to compare the safety and efficacy of open and laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer in an evidence-based approach using meta-analytical techniques.Methods A search of electronic databases, including MEDLINE and EMBASE, was conducted to identify relevant articles published between January 1990 and December 2002. Only studies in the English language comparing the outcomes of laparoscopic and open repair of perforated peptic ulcer were recruited. All reports were critically appraised with respect to their methodology and outcome. Data from all included studies were extracted using standardized data extraction forms developed a priori. Both qualitative and quantitative statistical analyses were performed. The effect size of outcome parameters was estimated by odds ratio where feasible and appropriate.Results A total of 13 publications comprising 658 patients met the inclusion criteria. The overall success rate of laparoscopic repair was 84.7% (n = 249). Postoperative pain was lower after laparoscopic repair than after open repair, supported by a significant reduction in postoperative analgesic requirement after laparoscopic repair. Meta-analyses demonstrated a significant reduction in the wound infection rate after laparoscopic repair, as compared with open repair, but a significantly higher reoperation rate was observed after laparoscopic repair.Conclusions Evidence suggests that laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer confers superior short-term benefits in terms of postoperative pain and wound morbidity. This approach is as safe and effective as open repair. Laparoscopic Graham–Steele patch repair of perforated duodenal or justapyloric ulcer is beneficial for patients without Boeys risk factors.     

腹腔镜与开腹消化性溃疡穿孔修补术比较的Meta分析

目的评价腹腔镜修补手术治疗消化性溃疡穿孔的安全性和有效性。方法收集1990－2011年公开发表的腹腔镜和开腹消化性溃疡穿孔修补术的中文和英文文献．对腹腔镜组和开腹组的术中情况、术后恢复情况及术后并发症情况进行Meta分析。结果筛选出符合纳入标准的研究19项,共1507例,腹腔镜组673例,开腹组834例。与开腹组相比,腹腔镜组患者术中出血量更少,术后排气时间更快、住院时间更短、术后切口感染率和围手术期死亡率更低（均P〈O．05）。两组患者手术时间和术后败血症、肺部感染、腹腔脓肿、修补处瘘发生率的差异则无统计学意义（均P〉O．05）。结论腹腔镜修补手术治疗消化性溃疡穿孔具有出血少、恢复快、切口感染和死亡率低的优势．安全可行。     

Elective laparoscopic-assisted colectomy for diverticular disease

Background: Although several recent reports described the different methods utilized for laparoscopic colon resection, only a few of them questioned whether the procedure is appropriate for the surgical treatment of diverticular disease. To assess this question, we performed a retrospective study of 50 consecutive patients operated using laparoscopic assistance to remove the sigmoid colon for diverticular disease. Method: The surgical technique was a laparoscopically assisted procedure that included mobilization of the left colon and vascular ligation laparoscopically and then, via a small abdominal incision, division of the colon, removal of the specimen, and hand-sewn anastomosis. Results: The surgical goal was achieved in 46 cases, with a conversion rate of 8%. The mean operative time was 195 min (range 150–280 min). There was no mortality, and the morbidity rate was 14%. There were no complications directly related to the laparoscopic technique. The mean return of regular bowel habits was 3.2 days, and the median postoperative stay was 10 days. Conclusions: These preliminary results suggest that laparoscopic-assisted sigmoidectomy can be used safely for the surgical treatment of diverticular disease. Received: 30 July 1997/Accepted: 21 January 1998     

Laparoscopic colorectal anastomosis: risk of postoperative leakage

Background: We report on a prospective observational multicenter study of more than 1,000 consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal procedures. The aim of the current study was to investigate the safety of laparoscopic colorectal surgery as reflected by the anastomotic insufficiency rates in the various sections of the bowel, and to compare these rates with those of open colorectal surgery. Methods: The study was begun on August 1, 1995. Twenty-four centers in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland participated in this prospective multicenter study. All patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery were included in the study. No selection criteria were applied, which means that every operation begun as a laparoscopic procedure was included. Data on patient demographics, surgical indications, surgical course, and patient outcome were recorded prospectively in a computer database. All data were rendered anonymous. Results: Between August 1995 and February 1998, the 24 participating centers treated 1,143 patients (male/female ratio, 1:1.36; mean age, 60.7 years). In all, 626 operations were performed for benign indications and 517 for cancer. Most procedures involved the sigmoid colon and rectum (80.9%). An anastomosis was performed in 83% of the operations. Most of the anastomoses were laparoscopically assisted using the stapling technique. We observed an overall leakage rate of 4.25% (colon 2.9%; rectum 12.7%), and surgical reintervention was required in 1% of the cases. The rate of conversion to open surgery was 5.6%. Intraoperative complications occurred in 5.9%, and reoperation was necessary in 4.1% of the cases. The overall morbidity rate was 22.3%, and the 30-day mortality rate was 1.57%. Conclusions: The feasibility and safety of the laparoscopic colorectal approach is demonstrated clearly. The current study shows that the laparoscopic or laparoscopically assisted approach to colorectal surgery is not associated with a higher risk of anastomotic leaks. Morbidity and mortality rates with this method approximate those seen with conventional colorectal surgery. Received: 24 August 1998/Accepted: 25 November 1998     

Simultaneous laparoscopic biliary and retrocolic gastric bypass in patients with unresectable carcinoma of the pancreas

Background: A substantial number of patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer eventually develop biliary or gastric outlet obstruction. In some cases, they present initially with both complications. These conditions contribute markedly to their discomfort and certainly justify palliative intervention. The purpose of this study was to examine the feasibility and safety of simultaneous laparoscopic biliary and gastric bypass in patients with unresectable carcinoma of the pancreas. Methods: Between August 1995 and July 1998, simultaneous laparoscopic biliary and retrocolic gastric bypass was performed successfully in 12 consecutive patients with unresectable carcinoma of the pancreas. There were eight men and four women. Their median age was 72 years (range, 50–82). In all patients, the indications for gastrointestinal bypass were gastric outlet obstruction and obstructive jaundice. The following parameters were evaluated for each patient: procedure-related morbidity and mortality, operative time, length of hospital stay, overall survival, and ability to sustain oral nutrition during the survival period. Results: All procedures were completed laparoscopically. The mean operative time was 89 ± 29.56 min. There were no intraoperative complications. Postoperative morbidity consisted of wound infection in two patients and pneumonia in one patient. One patient died of multiorgan failure on postoperative day 2. The mean hospital stay was 6.4 ± 1.5 days (range, 5–17). The mean survival time until death from underlying disease was 85 ± 32.46 days (range, 31–260). None of the patients had recurrent jaundice, and all of them were able to maintain oral nutrition. Conclusion: Simultaneous laparoscopic biliary and retrocolic gastric bypass is a safe and effective technique for the treatment of biliary and gastroduodenal obstruction in patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer. Received: 17 December 1998/Accepted: 13 May 1999