Home
About Us
Issues
Authors
Reviewers
Users
Subscription
Our Other Journals
Site map
Aims and Scope
Salient Features
Editorial Board
Editorial Statements
Editorial-PeerReview Process
Publication Ethics & Malpractice
Ijars Performance
Journal Policy
Contact Us
Current Issue
Forthcoming
Article Archive
Access Statistics
Simple Search
Advanced Search
Submit an Article
Instructions
Assistance
Publication Fee
Paid Services
Apply As Reviewer
Acknowledgment
Register Here Edit Register
Register For Article Submission
Login Here Logout
Login For Article Submission
Annual
Buy One Issue
Payment Options
How to Order
JCDR
IJNMR
NJLM

 

Welcome : Guest

Users Online :

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Original article / research

Year :2016 Month : July-August Volume : 5 Issue : 3 Page : -

Laparoscopic Repair of Peptic Ulcer Perforation - Single Centre Experience

Correspondence Address :
Pravin D Bhingare, Umesh Ravikant Shelke, Rahul V Saxena, Sumeet V Sasane, Yogesh A Bang,
Dr. Umesh R Shelke,
Department of Urology, 8th floor, MSB Building,
Seth GS Medical College and KEM Hospital, Mumbai,
Maharashtra-400012, India.
E-mail: drumshelke@gmail.com
Introduction: Introduction: Laparotomy with peritoneal lavage and perforation repair is the standard management of perforated peptic ulcer. But the open surgery is associated with increased morbidity and delay in returning to routine activities. Laparoscopic procedures are associated with less pain post-operatively with early return to daily activities.

Aim: To assess the feasibility of laparoscopy in the management of peptic ulcer perforation at our centre.

Materials and Methods: It was an observational study, conducted from June 2009 to November 2011. Patients with peptic ulcer perforation aged 18-50 years, presenting within 72 hours of initiation of symptoms were included. Feasibility of laparoscopic repair was evaluated in terms of intra-op difficulties during repair, operative duration, post-op recovery and complications. Descriptive statistic was used.

Results: All 42 patients were male with mean age of 29.3 years. Seventy six percent patients presented within 48 hours. Mean duration for repair was 69.34 minutes. Ryle’s tube was kept for mean duration of 2.14 days. Mean duration for drain removal was 4.24 days and for hospital stay, it was 5.52 days.

Conclusion: It is feasible to use laparoscopy for repair of perforation in earlier presenting patients.
 
[ FULL TEXT ]   |   [ ]
 

Article Utilities

  • Readers Comments
  • Article in PDF
  • Citation Manager
  • Article Statistics
  • Link to PUBMED
  • Print this Article
  • Send to a Friend

Quick Links

REVIEWER
ACCESS STATISTICS
Home  |  About Us  |  Online First  |  Current Issue  |  Simple Search  |  Advance Search  |  Register  |  Login  |  Contact  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Use
Author Support  |  Submit Manuscript  |  IJARS Pre-Publishing  |  Reviewer  |  Articles Archive  |  Access Statistics
©INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ANATOMY RADIOLOGY & SURGERY (IJARS), ISSN : 2277-8543.
EDITORIAL OFFICE : 1/9, Roop Nagar, Delhi 11000. Phone : 01123848553

* This Journal is owned and run by medical professionals *