Open versus laparoscopic technique in peptic ulcus perforation, how effective are score systems? Single-center experience and literature review

BACKGROUND: One of the most common peptic ulcer complications is perforation (PUP) which also remains an important cause of morbidity and mortality. In this study, it was aimed to compare the results of patients who had similar pre-operative scoring index results (Boey, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) and Mannheim Peritonitis Index (MPI), and type of surgery. METHODS: Pre-operative Boey, CCI, and MPI scores were calculated by retrospectively examining the files of patients who were operated under emergency conditions with the diagnosis of PUP. The patients divided into two groups those who underwent laparoscopic surgery/Group-1 and open surgery/Group-2. RESULTS: There was no statistical difference between the groups in terms of demographic data, hospital admission time, and length of hospital stay. The operation time was found to be longer in the laparoscopic group (110,2 SD20,6/75–150 min) than open group (54,2 SD15,7/30–120 min) (p<0.001). Morbidity was less in laparoscopic group (4% versus 14.6%) (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: The laparoscopic method may be used safely in PUP due to the lower post-operative complication rates and known advantages of minimally invasive surgery.