What is the Ideal Surgical Approach for Perforated Gastro-Duodenal Ulcer?

Abstract

This is a single-center, non-randomized retrospective study that compares various clinical and evolutionary aspects of patients with perforated gastro-duodenal ulcers in order to determine the best surgical approach. The study included 35 patients who underwent surgical treatment for a perforated gastro-duodenal ulcer at Brașov County Emergency Clinical Hospital (SCJU BV) between January 2021 and January 2023. They were then divided into two groups based on whether the surgery was laparoscopic or traditional. A variety of clinical and paraclinical data were collected and compared. There were no variations in gender distribution, age, or site of the ulcer perforation across the groups. Patients who underwent a laparoscopic procedure had a smaller ulcer perforation, a faster resumption of intestinal transit, and a shorter hospital stay than those who underwent a standard procedure. At 3 days postoperatively, the Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte Ratio (NLR) and the Systemic Inflammation Response Index (SIRI) were significantly lower in the laparoscopic group. Patients who underwent traditional surgery had a higher Boey score, needed more complex interventions, and had a higher rate of postoperative complications and mortality. In perforated gastro-duodenal ulcer cases, the laparoscopic approach is a viable option with numerous advantages, particularly in patients with a low Boey score. Meanwhile, the traditional approach may be reserved for cases with a high Boey score and complex surgical interventions.