Duodenal perforation in a SARS-CoV-2-positive patient with negative PCR results for SARS-CoV-2 in the peritoneal fluid.

OBJECTIVE: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has significantly affected health care organizations globally. Many aspects of this disease, as well as the risks for patients treated with multiple drug regimens to control severe COVID-19, are unclear. During emergency surgery for SARS-CoV-2-positive patients, the risk of SARS-CoV-2 exposure and transmission to the surgical staff has yet to be determined. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this report, we describe a SARS-CoV-2-positive patient with severe respiratory syndrome treated with multiple doses of IL-6 inhibitors who presented with a perforated duodenal ulcer and underwent emergency surgery. During and after surgery, we tested for SARS-CoV-2 at the ulcer site and in the peritoneal fluid. RESULTS: The history of the patient allows for two possible interpretations of the pathogenesis of the duodenal ulcer, which could have been a stress ulcer, or a gastrointestinal ulcer associated to the use of IL-6 inhibitors. We also noticed that the ulcer site and peritoneal fluid repeatedly tested negative for SARS-CoV-2. Therefore, we reviewed the pertinent literature on gastrointestinal bleeding in patients with COVID-19 and on SARS-CoV-2 detection in the peritoneal fluid of surgical patients and discussed possible prevention strategies for bleeding and the actual risk of infection for the surgical staff. CONCLUSIONS: The first implication of this case is that the relation between repeated administration of IL-6 inhibitors and upper gastrointestinal bleeding and perforation must be investigated, and that the threshold for administering prophylactic proton pump inhibitors therapy should be carefully considered for patients with severe COVID-19. The second implication is that further testing should be performed on the peritoneal fluid of COVID-19 patients undergoing emergency surgical procedures to clarify the discordant results for the presence of SARS-CoV-2 in the peritoneal cavity and the possible risk of transmission to the surgical staff.

Eradication of Helicobacter pylori improves the healing rate and reduces the relapse rate of nonbleeding ulcers in patients with bleeding peptic ulcer.

OBJECTIVE: A causal relationship between Helicobacter pylori (H. pylori) and peptic ulcer complications remains obscure. The aim of this study was to determine the importance of H. pylori and other risk factors for healing rate, ulcer recurrence, and rebleeding in patients with bleeding peptic ulcer. METHOD: A total of 223 patients with H. pylori positive bleeding peptic ulcer were randomly allocated to three treatment groups: 1) quadruple therapy (QT) (88 patients); 2) dual therapy (DT) (88 patients); and 3) omeprazole and placebo therapy (OPl) (47 patients). Endoscopic assessment was performed initially and at 8 and 52 wk. Ulcer healing and eradication rates were assessed; endpoints were ulcer relapse and ulcer rebleeding during 52 wk. RESULTS: Results after 8 and 52 wk were available for 211 and 179 patients, respectively. Eradication rate was 100% (95% CI = 96-100%) in the QT, 84% (95% CI = 74-91%) in the DT, and 4% (95% CI = 1-15%) in the OPl group. Ulcer healing rate was 95% (95% CI = 91-98%) in H. pylori negative and 8% (95% CI = 70-91%) in H. pylori positive patients. Ulcer relapses occurred in 2% (95% CI = 0.5-6%) of H. pylori negative and in 38% (95% CI = 24-54%) of H. pylori positive patients, and rebleeding occurred in five patients (three H. pylori positive and two negative). CONCLUSIONS: Eradication of H. pylori infection enhances healing of bleeding peptic ulcers after endoscopic therapy. H. pylori infection is an important independent risk factor for relapsing of nonbleeding ulcers in patients with bleeding peptic ulcer.