Evaluation of clinico-radiological factors affecting morbidity and mortality in peptic ulcer perforation surgery
Abstract
Objectives: Peptic ulcer perforation (PUP) remains a surgical emergency with high early period morbidity and mortality. In this study, it was aimed to evaluate clinico-radiological factors affecting morbidity and mortality in peptic ulcer perforation surgery.
Methods: Patients who were operated for PUP at Erzurum Regional Training and Research Hospital General Surgery Clinic, Erzurum, Turkey between 2010 and 2020 were selected retrospectively. The patients’ clinical and radiological parameters were retrieved from their medical records. Patients who developed complications in the 30 days after surgery were considered the morbidity-positive group, and the patients who developed mortality in the 30 days after surgery were considered the mortality-positive group. The relationship between investigated factors and morbidity and mortality was investigated with suitable statistical tests. A p value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Results: The study included 81 patients and, 74 (91.4%) patients were males. Complications were observed in 15 (18.5%) patients and mortality was seen in 3 (3.7%) patients in the first 30 days postoperatively. Preoperative comorbidity, low systolic blood pressure, high Boey score had negative effect on both morbidity and mortality. In addition, lower amylase levels played a protective role in both morbidity (p = 0.011) and mortality (p = 0.018). Mortality increased significantly with increasing age. However, no radiological factor affected either morbidity or mortality.
Conclusions: Both morbidity and mortality increased in cases with poor clinical condition at the time of diagnosis. In addition, the mortality rate was higher in patients with comorbidities and postoperative complications.
Keywords
References
- 1. Eisner F, Hermann D, Bajaeifer K, Glatzle J, Königsrainer A, Küper MA. Gastric ulcer complications after the introduction of proton pump inhibitors into clinical routine: 20-year experience. Visc Med 2017;33:221-6.
- 2. Dutta AK, Chacko A, Balekuduru A, Sahu MK, Gangadharan SK. Time trends in epidemiology of peptic ulcer disease in India over two decades. Indian J Gastroenterol 2012;31:111-5.
- 3. Tarasconi A, Coccolini F, Biffl WL, Tomasoni M, Ansaloni L, Picetti E, et al. Perforated and bleeding peptic ulcer: WSES guidelines. World J Emerg Surg 2020;15:1-24.
- 4. Svanes C. Trends in perforated peptic ulcer: incidence, etiology, treatment, and prognosis. World J Surg 2000;24:277-83.
- 5. Thorsen K, Glomsaker TB, von Meer A, Søreide K, Søreide JA. Trends in diagnosis and surgical management of patients with perforated peptic ulcer. J Gastrointest Surg 2011;15:1329-35.
- 6. Byrne BE, Bassett M, Rogers CA, Anderson ID, Beckingham I, Blazeby JM. Short-term outcomes after emergency surgery for complicated peptic ulcer disease from the UK National Emergency Laparotomy Audit: a cohort study. BMJ Open 2018;8:e023721.
- 7. Sommer T, Elbroend H, Friis-Andersen H. Laparoscopic repair of perforated ulcer in Western Denmark--a retrospective study. Scand J Surg 2010;99:119-21.
- 8. Özkan E, Dulundu E, Özel Y, Yıldız MK, Yardımcı S, Topaloğlu. [Size determines morbidity, older age and ASA score determines mortality in peptic ulcus perforation]. Haydarpaşa Numune Eğitim ve Araştırma Hastanesi Tıp Dergisi 2008;48:222-8. [Article in Turkish]
Details
Primary Language
English
Subjects
Surgery
Journal Section
Research Article
Authors
Mustafa Yeni
*
0000-0003-2384-2094
Türkiye
Murat Kartal
0000-0003-1396-5365
Türkiye
Tolga Kalaycı
0000-0002-6977-1757
Türkiye
Publication Date
March 4, 2022
Submission Date
May 16, 2021
Acceptance Date
October 3, 2021
Published in Issue
Year 2022 Volume: 8 Number: 2