[Open and laparoscopic surgery via minimally invasive approach in the treatment of perforated ulcer: a systematic review and metaanalysis]

OBJECTIVE

Systematic review and metaanalysis of the effectiveness of open and minimally invasive laparoscopic suturing of perforated peptic ulcer.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Searching for Russian and English language reports included Scientific Electronic Library, Cochrane Collaboration Library and PubMed databases. We have analyzed contents of specialized journals, reviews and their references. Unpublished data were obtained via communication with chiefs of national surgical hospitals. RevMan 5.3 software was used for metaanalysis.

RESULTS

We found no international randomized trials in available literature. Metaanalysis was based on national non-randomized studies. Total sample was 1177 cases. Laparoscopic minimally invasive surgery was performed in 43% of cases (n=503), open suturing - in 57% (n=674) of patients. Choice of these procedures is not currently not standardized. Minimally invasive procedures are shorter in time (mean difference -8.02, 95% CI -11.26 - -4.77, p<0.00001) and ensure less hospital-stay (mean difference -1.93, 95% CI -2.97 - -0.88, p=0.0003). Complications were less common (OR 0.14, 95% CI 0.07-0.27, p<0.00001) after minimally invasive operations (2.4%, 12/503) compared to laparotomy (11.4%, 77/674). Incidence of suture failure was similar (OR 0.4, 95% CI 0.1-1.6, p=0.2) (0.4% (2/503) vs. 0.7% (5/674)). Postoperative mortality was higher (OR 0.14, 95% CI 0.05-0.37, p<0.0001) after laparotomy (8%, 54/674) compared to laparoscopy (0.8%, 4/503).

CONCLUSION

A metaanalysis indicates the advantage of laparoscopy-assisted suturing of perforated ulcer via minimally invasive approach over laparotomy. The absence of a standardized approach in choosing of minimally invasive laparotomy and conventional approach is a limitation of these results.