EARLY OUTCOMES OF SURGICAL TREATMENT FOR GIANT PERFORATED PEPTIC ULCERS

Văn Cao Nguyễn 1,2,, Tiến Quang Phạm 1,2, Ngọc Anh Nguyễn 1,2, Đình Tuy Hoàng 1,3, Tuấn Anh Nguyễn 1,2, Quang Duy Ngô 2, Huy Lưu Lê 1,4
1 Department of General Surgery, School of Medicine, University of Medicine and Pharmacy at Ho Chi Minh City
2 Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Gia Dinh People's Hospital
3 Department of General Surgery, Le Van Thinh Hospital
4 Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, Nguyen Tri Phuong Hospital

Main Article Content

Abstract

Background: Surgical management of giant peptic ulcer perforations remains a significant challenge for surgeons, associated with high morbidity and mortality rates. This study aims to evaluate the early postoperative outcomes of surgical treatment for giant gastroduodenal ulcer perforations. Method: This retrospective case series analyzed patients with giant perforated peptic ulcers and a perforation diameter ≥ 2 cm treated at Gia Dinh People’s Hospital between June 2021 and March 2024. Results: During the study period, 44 patients with giant peptic ulcer perforations were included in study. Surgical management included primary closure (n = 34), gastrectomy (n = 7), and the Newman procedure (n = 3). The median age was 70 years (range: 23–94 years), with a male-to-female ratio of 1.3:1. Patients with ASA physical status III and IV accounted for 88.7% of the cases. Preoperative septic shock was present in 34.1% of the patients. The overall morbidity rate was 75%, with subgroup rates of 70.4% for primary closure, 71.4% for gastrectomy, and 100% for the Newman procedure. The overall mortality rate was 50%; specifically, 44.1% in the primary closure group, 71.4% in the gastrectomy group, and 66.7% in the Newman procedure group. Conclusion: Patients with giant peptic ulcer perforations frequently present with a severe clinical status. Primary closure remains the most commonly utilized surgical approach. The incidence of postoperative complications and motalities remains high in this study.

Article Details

References

1. Lau JY, Sung J, Hill C, Henderson C, Howden CW, Metz DC. Systematic review of the epidemiology of complicated peptic ulcer disease: incidence, recurrence, risk factors and mortality. Digestion. 2011;84(2):102-113.
2. Møller MH, Engebjerg MC, Adamsen S, Bendix J, Thomsen RW. The Peptic Ulcer Perforation (PULP) score: a predictor of mortality following peptic ulcer perforation. A cohort study. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. May 2012;56(5):655-62. doi:10.1111/j.1399-6576.2011.02609.x
3. Chung KT, Shelat VG. Perforated peptic ulcer-an update. World journal of gastrointestinal surgery. 2017;9(1):1.
4. Lal P, Vindal A, Hadke NS. Controlled tube duodenostomy in the management of giant duodenal ulcer perforation: a new technique for a surgically challenging condition. Am J Surg. Sep 2009;198(3):319-23. doi:10.1016/j.amjsurg.2008.09.028
5. Jusoh AC, Omar S, Sazali H, Omar S. Perforated giant duodenal ulcer: A review. International Medicine. 2020;doi:10.5455/im.104546
6. Tarasconi A, Coccolini F, Biffl WL, et al. Perforated and bleeding peptic ulcer: WSES guidelines. World Journal of Emergency Surgery. 2020/01/07 2020;15(1):3. doi:10.1186/s13017-019-0283-9
7. Clinch D, Damaskos D, Di Marzo F, Di Saverio S. Duodenal ulcer perforation: A systematic literature review and narrative description of surgical techniques used to treat large duodenal defects. Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery. 2021;91(4):748-758. doi:10.1097/ta.0000000000003357
8. Chan KS, Wang YL, Chan XW, Shelat VG. Outcomes of omental patch repair in large or giant perforated peptic ulcer are comparable to gastrectomy. European Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery. 2021;47(6):1745-1752.