Improvement of Russian clinical guidelines and reduction of mortality in perforated ulcers / O perspektivakh sovershenstvovaniya rossiiskikh klinicheskikh rekomendatsii i snizheniya letal'nosti pri probodnoi yazve.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the results of laparoscopic surgery in patients with perforated ulcers using evidence-based medicine approaches. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We compared the efficacy and effectiveness of laparoscopic and open surgeries in patients with perforated ulcers. Meta-analysis of mortality after laparoscopic surgeries (randomized controlled trials) and trial sequential analysis were carried out. RESULTS: We clarified the differences between the efficacy and effectiveness of laparoscopic surgeries regarding postoperative mortality. In the Russian Federation, mortality after laparoscopic surgery is 9-11 times lower compared to open procedures. According to evidence-based researches (efficacy of laparoscopic interventions in 10 meta-analyses), these differences are less obvious (1.4-3.0 times) and not significant. The diversity-adjusted required information size to draw reasonable conclusions about differences in mortality in trial sequential analysis was 68 181 participants. Meta-analyses of RCTs also demonstrate lower incidence of wound complications (1.8-5.0% after laparoscopic surgery and 6.3-13.3% after laparotomy), shorter hospital-stay (mean difference from -0.13 to -2.84) and less severe pain syndrome (mean difference in VAS score from -2.08 to -2.45) after laparoscopic technologies. CONCLUSION: The obvious advantage of laparoscopic surgery in patients with perforated ulcers is fast-truck recovery following shorter hospital-stay, mild pain and rarer wound complications. Comparison of postoperative mortality regarding efficacy and effectiveness is difficult due to insufficient introduction of laparoscopic technologies in clinical practice and diversity-adjusted required information size.

[Laparoscopic versus laparoscopy-assisted suturing of perforated peptic ulcers (meta-analysis)]. / Laparoskopicheskoe i laparoskopicheski assistirovannoe ushivanie probodnoi yazvy (metaanaliz).

OBJECTIVE: To compare laparoscopic and laparoscopy-assisted repair of perforated peptic ulcer using evidence-based methods. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis were carried out in accordance with the recommendations of the Ministry of Health of Russian Federation and Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews.Data searching was carried out in Russian and English languages using the E-library, Cochrane Library and PubMed databases. We analyzed titles and references in specialized journals and thematic reviews, respectively. Clarifying information was obtained via personal contacts with the heads of surgical hospitals. The RevMan 5.4 software was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: We found no randomized trials devoted to comparison of laparoscopic and laparoscopy-assisted surgeries in patients with perforated peptic ulcer. Meta-analysis was based on non-randomized trials with satisfactory methodological quality according to the I-ROBINS formalized assessment. Overall clinical material included 478 observations: 229 (47.9%) laparoscopic surgeries and 249 (52.1%) laparoscopy-assisted procedures via minimally invasive access. There were no conversions. Incidence of postoperative complications was 4.36 and 8.83% (OR=0.39, 95% CI 0.08, 1.87), postoperative mortality 0.87 and 0.81%, respectively (OR=1.26, 95% CI 0.08, 8.24). Laparoscopic surgeries were shorter (MD= -8 min, 95% CI -9.7, -6.4). Length of hospital-stay was also shorter after laparoscopic surgery (MD= -4.6, 95% CI -9.7, -6.4). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic operations are shorter and accompanied by lower incidence of postoperative complications and less hospital-stay. Large statistical power is required to confirm these differences.

Open Versus Laparoscopic Repair of Perforated Peptic Ulcer Disease: A Propensity-matched Study of the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare open surgery (OS) with laparoscopic surgery (LS) for perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) disease using a National dataset. BACKGROUND: PPU disease is typically treated surgically with an omental patch. This can be performed through OS or a LS. Current evidence in OS versus LS suggests equivalence in mortality and postoperative complications, but a decrease in pain and wound infections with LS. METHODS: A one-to-one propensity score-matched analysis of patients who underwent PPU repair from December 2013 to December 2017 using data from the National Emergency Laparotomy Audit was performed. Patients with an initially laparoscopic approach were classed as LS even if converted to OS. The primary end-point was 90-day mortality; secondary endpoints were length of stay (LOS), re-operation, and re-admission to critical care. Multivariable logistic and linear models were created to compare the effect of operative approach on binary and continuous outcomes with log-rank tests for time-to-event data. RESULTS: A total of 5253 patients underwent surgery in the study period. After propensity-matching, 2 groups of 1158 patients were created. Overall 90-day mortality was 7.5%. There was no difference between the LA and OA for 90-day mortality (7.2% vs 8.5%, OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.56- 1.15, P = 0.23), median LOS (equivalent at 7 days, P = 0.09), reoperation (3.6% vs 4.0%, P = 0.74), or re-admission to critical care (2.8% vs 2.9%, P = 0.92). Across the 4-year study period LS use increased from 20% to 26% and the conversion rate decreased from 40% to 31%. CONCLUSIONS: Short outcomes from laparoscopic PPU repair appear equivalent to open repair. There is increasing adoption of LS with decreasing conversion rates. LS for PPU appears to be an acceptable approach in this setting.

[Emergency laparoscopy in the treatment of perforated gastroduodenal ulcers]. / Ekstrennaya laparoskopiya pri lechenii perforativnykh gastroduodenal'nykh yazv.

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.

[Open and laparoscopic surgery via minimally invasive approach in the treatment of perforated ulcer: a systematic review and metaanalysis]. / Laparotomnye i laparoskopicheski assistirovannye operatsii iz minidostupa v lechenii probodnoi yazvy. Sistematicheskii obzor i metaanaliz.

OBJECTIVE: Systematic review and metaanalysis of the effectiveness of open and minimally invasive laparoscopic suturing of perforated peptic ulcer. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Searching for Russian and English language reports included Scientific Electronic Library, Cochrane Collaboration Library and PubMed databases. We have analyzed contents of specialized journals, reviews and their references. Unpublished data were obtained via communication with chiefs of national surgical hospitals. RevMan 5.3 software was used for metaanalysis. RESULTS: We found no international randomized trials in available literature. Metaanalysis was based on national non-randomized studies. Total sample was 1177 cases. Laparoscopic minimally invasive surgery was performed in 43% of cases (n=503), open suturing - in 57% (n=674) of patients. Choice of these procedures is not currently not standardized. Minimally invasive procedures are shorter in time (mean difference -8.02, 95% CI -11.26 - -4.77, p<0.00001) and ensure less hospital-stay (mean difference -1.93, 95% CI -2.97 - -0.88, p=0.0003). Complications were less common (OR 0.14, 95% CI 0.07-0.27, p<0.00001) after minimally invasive operations (2.4%, 12/503) compared to laparotomy (11.4%, 77/674). Incidence of suture failure was similar (OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.1-1.6, p=0.2) (0.4% (2/503) vs. 0.7% (5/674)). Postoperative mortality was higher (OR 0.14, 95% CI 0.05-0.37, p<0.0001) after laparotomy (8%, 54/674) compared to laparoscopy (0.8%, 4/503). CONCLUSION: A metaanalysis indicates the advantage of laparoscopy-assisted suturing of perforated ulcer via minimally invasive approach over laparotomy. The absence of a standardized approach in choosing of minimally invasive laparotomy and conventional approach is a limitation of these results.

[Fast-track recovery for perforated duodenal ulcer]. / Metod uskorennogo vyzdorovleniya pri perforativnoi yazve dvenadtsatiperstnoi kishki.

OBJECTIVE: To study the outcomes of fast-track recovery in patients with perforated duodenal ulcer (PDU). MATERIAL AND METHODS: There were 138 patients with PDU who underwent surgical treatment for the period from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2019. Patients were divided into 3 groups: main group, control group 1 (CG-1) and control group 2 (CG-2). The main group (fast-track group, FT-group) included 51 patients who underwent laparoscopic suturing of PDU followed by enhanced recovery (fast-track). CG-1 comprised 44 patients who underwent open suturing of PDU and conventional perioperative treatment. CG-2 consisted of 43 patients who underwent laparoscopic suturing and conventional perioperative treatment. Complications were assessed using Clavien-Dindo grading system. RESULTS: In the FT group, postoperative complications were observed in 2 patients (3.92%). Anemia of mixed genesis (Clavien-Dindo grade II) was diagnosed in 1 patient and left-sided lower lobe pneumonia in another one (grade II). There were no deaths. Mean length of hospital-stay was 3.86 days. In the 1st control group, the largest number of complications was observed (n=12, 27.27%) including 9 extra-abdominal complications (pulmonary disorders (II) - 7 patients (15.9%); sepsis (IVB) - 1 (2.27%), delirium (IVA) - 1 patient (2.27%), postoperative wound seroma (IIIA) - 1 (2.27%) patient). Intra-abdominal complications consisted of compensated pyloroduodenal stenosis (II) in 1 (2.27%) case, recurrent bleeding from acute gastric and duodenal ulcers (IIIB) in 1 (2.27%) patient. Mortality rate was 4.54% (n=2) in this group (progressive multiple organ failure). Mean length of hospital-stay was 7.56 days. In the 2nd control group, postoperative complications included extra-abdominal (pulmonary disorders (II) - pneumonia in 4 (9.3%) cases, spontaneous pneumothorax (IIIA) in 1 (2.32%) case) and intra-abdominal events (duodenitis (II) in 1 (2.32%) patient and compensated pyloroduodenal stenosis (II) in another 1 (2.32%) patient). There were no lethal outcomes in this group. Mean length of hospital-stay was 6.7 days. CONCLUSION: Treatment outcomes in patients with perforated duodenal ulcer confirmed an effectiveness of laparoscopic suturing and complete abdominal sanitation. These measures create the prerequisites for fast track recovery in urgent surgical practice. FT-protocol of inpatient management is followed by reduced hospital-stay and less incidence of postoperative complications. Moreover, this approach promotes early and safe discharge of patients.

Diagnosis and management of duodenal perforations: a narrative review.

Duodenal perforation is a rare, but potentially life-threatening injury. Multiple etiologies are associated with duodenal perforations such as peptic ulcer disease, iatrogenic causes and trauma. Computed tomography with intravenous and oral contrast is the most valuable imaging technique to identify duodenal perforation. In some cases, surgical exploration may be necessary for diagnosis. Specific treatment depends upon the nature of the disease process that caused the perforation, the timing, location and extent of the injury and the clinical condition of the patient. Conservative management seems to be feasible in stable patients with sealed perforations. Immediate surgery is required for patients presenting with peritonitis and/or intra-abdominal sepsis. Minimally invasive techniques are safe and effective alternatives to conventional open surgery in selected patients with duodenal perforations. Here we review the current literature on duodenal perforations and discuss the outcomes of different treatment strategies.

Gastrointestinal basidiobolomycosis in a patient suffering from duodenal ulcer with perforation: First case report from Italy.

Gastrointestinal basidiobolomycosis (GIB), an unusual fungal infection caused by the fungus Basidiobolus ranarum, is rarely reported in the medical literature. GIB is difficult to diagnose because its clinical presentation is non-specific and has no identifiable risk factors. We report here the first case of GIB diagnosed in Italy in a patient suffering from a duodenal ulcer with perforation. The patient was successfully treated with itraconazole. The absence of non-specific signs and symptoms of GIB may delay a definitive diagnosis and treatment. A microbiological investigation should always be requested in order to reach a rapid and definitive diagnosis and to rule out other intestinal diseases.

[Fast track rehabilitation in perforated duodenal ulcer]. / Uskorennaia reabilitatsiia pri probodnoi iazve dvenadtsatiperstnoi kishki.

AIM: To analyze the outcomes of fast track rehabilitation program in patients with perforated duodenal ulcer (PDU). MATERIAL AND METHODS: For the period 2013-2016 at the Department of Surgery and Endoscopy 206 PDU patients have been treated. Inclusion criterion for the main group (n=77) was duodenal ulcers, their dimension up to 1 cm, laparoscopic suture of perforated ulcer, fast track rehabilitation program implementation. The control group consisted of 129 patients who underwent open suturing of perforated ulcer followed by conventional treatment in postoperative period. RESULTS: In the main group (n=77) laparoscopic suturing of ulcerative defect with the use of Fast Track program was performed. Postoperative complication i.e. sutures failure was observed in 1 (1.3%) case. There were no lethal outcomes in the main group. Mean length of hospital-stay was 4.8 days. In 129 patients of the control group open suturing of the perforated ulcer and conventional postoperative therapy were applied. Postoperative surgical complications were absent in the control group; mortality rate was 2.3%. Mean length of postoperative hospital-stay was 8.1 days. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic treatment of perforated ulcers facilitates application of fast track rehabilitation program in emergency patients. Fast track rehabilitation protocol after laparoscopic suturing of the perforated ulcer creates conditions for early discharge and is followed by good clinical and economic effects. Recurrent peptic ulcers are noted if antiulcer therapy is absent.

[Perforated peptic ulcer closure: laparoscopic or open?] / Ushivanie perforativnoi pepticheskoi yazvy: laparoskopicheskoe ili otkrytoe? (s kommentariem A.S. Ermolova).

AIM: To compare laparoscopic and open closure of perforated peptic ulcer (PPU). MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study included 153 patients who underwent PPU suturing. 78 patients underwent laparoscopic closure (laparoscopic group) and open suturing via upper midline laparotomy was performed in 75 cases (open group). Surgery time, postoperative pain severity, time of analgesics intake, postoperative complications, hospital-stay and and cosmetic effect were compared. RESULTS: Laparoscopic PPU closure may be effective and accessible in experienced endoscopic surgeon. It significantly reduces postoperative pain severity, need for analgesics, incidence of postoperative complications and provides excellent cosmetic effect. However, there is greater time of surgery compared with open intervention. There were no significant differences in hspital-stay between groups. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic PPU suturing can be considered a good alternative to open surgery. Further researches are needed for standardization, assessment of safety, real advantages and disadvantages of laparoscopic technique.

DIAGNOSTICS AND TREATMENT OF PERFORATED PYLORODUODENUM ULCERS IN WOMEN.

The results of treatment of 75 women with perforated ulcers have been studied. There were prevailed women of middle and elderly age groups among patients who underwent surgery. A wound closure of perforated opening and abdominal sanation were performed by laparoscopic means in 30,7% of patients and using midline laparotomy in 29,3% cases. There were carried out the laparoscopic sanation of the abdominal cavity and the wound closure of perforated ulcer from mini-access using the set of mini-assistant in 10,7% patients. Radical operations were applied in 16% cases. The early postoperative complications took place in 8,1% of the patients, the rate of lethality was 4,0%. The long-term results were evaluated and considered as good in 55,5% women, satisfactory ­ in 30,1% and unsatisfactory ­ in 14,2% cases.

[Prophylaxis for stress ulcer bleeding in the intensive care unit]. / Profilaxis para sangrado por ulceras de estrés en la unidad de cuidados intensivos.

BACKGROUND: The critically ill patient can develop gastric erosions and, on occasion, stress ulcers with severe gastrointestinal bleeding that can be fatal. AIMS: The purpose of this review was to provide current information on the pathophysiology, risk factors, and prophylaxis of digestive tract bleeding from stress ulcers in the intensive care unit. METHODS: We identified articles through a PubMed search, covering the years 1970 to 2013. The most relevant articles were selected using the search phrases "stress ulcer", "stress ulcer bleeding prophylaxis", and "stress-related mucosal bleeding" in combination with "intensive care unit". RESULTS: The incidence of clinically significant bleeding has decreased dramatically since 1980. The most important risk factors are respiratory failure and coagulopathy. Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) or H2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs) are used in stress ulcer bleeding prophylaxis. Both drugs have been shown to be superior to placebo in reducing the risk for gastrointestinal bleeding and PPIs are at least as effective as H2RAs. Early enteral feeding has been shown to reduce the risk for stress ulcer bleeding, albeit in retrospective studies. CONCLUSIONS: Admittance to the intensive care unit in itself does not justify prophylaxis. PPIs are at least as effective as H2RAs. We should individualize the treatment of each patient in the intensive care unit, determining risk and evaluating the need to begin prophylaxis.

How to do laparoscopic repair of perforated anterior duodenal ulcers: a 'three arches' falciform patch technique simplifies the approach.

Laparoscopic repair of perforated duodenal ulcers has proven superior results to open procedures though uptake has been poor. We describe the 'three arches' technique as a means of reducing technical difficulty and improving operative efficiency. Our case series of patients undergoing this technique for perforated peptic ulcer disease demonstrates comparable results to other methods of repair.

[Clinical introduction of the method of the abdominal cavity infiltrate dissection with saving of anatomic integrity and functional capacity of organs, included in the inflammatory process].

The results of application of the tissue dissection method and hemostasis performance while operation for the abdominal organs acute diseases were summarized. The proposed method introduction have permitted to reduce the intraoperative complications rate from 66.6%--in a control group to 12.2%--in the main group; postoperative complications--from 21.2 to 1.7%, postoperative lethality--from 7.4 to 1.7%.

Comparison of Omental Patch Closure Versus Simple Closure for Laparoscopic Repair of Perforated Peptic Ulcer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

AIMS: To evaluate comparative outcomes of laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer with omental patch versus without omental patch. METHODS: A systematic search of multiple electronic data sources was conducted, and all studies comparing laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) with and without omental patch were included. Operative time, postoperative complications, re-operation and mortality were the evaluated outcome parameters for the meta-analysis. Revman 5.3 was used for data analysis. RESULTS: Four observational studies reporting a total number of 438 patients who underwent laparoscopic repair of PPU with (n = 268) or without (n = 170) omental patch were included. Operative time was significantly shorter in no-omental patch group (NOP) when compared to omental patch group (P = .02). There was no significant difference in the risk of postoperative ileus (Odd ratio (OR) .76, P = .61), leakage (OR 1.17, P = .80), wound infection (OR 1.89, P = .34), intra-abdominal abscess (OR 1.17, P = .87), re-operation (OR .00, P = .94) and mortality (OR .55, P = .48). Moreover, length of hospital stay was comparable between the two groups (P = .81). CONCLUSION: Laparoscopic repair of PPU with or without omental patch have comparable postoperative complications and mortality rate. However, considering the shorter operative time, no-omental patch approach is an attractive and more favourable choice. Well-designed randomized controlled trials are needed to investigate this comparison.

Saline irrigation versus gauze wiping and suction only for peritoneal decontamination during laparoscopic repair for perforated peptic ulcer disease.

The aim of current single-center study was to compare the short-term outcome of suction and gauze wiping alone versus the irrigation and suction technique for peritoneal decontamination among patients who underwent laparoscopic repair of PPU. Using data from our institution's prospectively maintained database, 105 patients who underwent laparoscopic repair were enrolled in this study. The participants were further divided into the group who received peritoneal irrigation (irrigation group, n = 67) and group who received gauze wiping and suction only (suction only group, n = 38). The irrigation group had a longer operative time (140 vs. 113 min, p = 0.0001), higher number of drainage tubes (38.8% vs. 0%, p < 0.0001) and a higher incidence of intra-abdominal abscess (10.4% vs. 0%, p = 0.0469) than the suction only group. Peritoneal irrigation may be associated with a prolonged operative time and a higher number of abdominal drains. Meanwhile, gauze wiping and suction may be sufficient for peritoneal decontamination during the laparoscopic repair of PPU as further infectious complications are not observed.