A comparison of short-term outcomes between laparoscopic and open emergent repair of perforated peptic ulcers

Daniel L. Davenport, Walker R. Ueland, Shyanie Kumar, Margaret Plymale, Andrew C. Bernard, J. Scott Roth

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

9 Scopus citations


Background: We compared 30-day outcomes in patients undergoing emergent open and laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcers in a large multicenter cohort. Methods: Prospectively obtained data in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program public use files from 2010 to 2016 were reviewed. Perioperative risks and outcomes were compared in unmatched and propensity-matched groups using parametric/non-parametric statistical tests as appropriate. Results: A total of 4210 procedures were identified 345 (8.2%) laparoscopic and 3865 (91.8%) open. Laparoscopic repairs increased from 4.5% of 2010 cases to 11.4% of 2016 cases (p <.001). Open repair patients had more acute presentation including higher rates of ASA class, hypoalbuminemia, preoperative septic shock, dyspnea, and mechanical ventilation (all p <.01). Laparoscopic operations were longer than open procedures (p <.001). Mortality (8.5 vs. 3.5%), median length of stay (7 vs. 5 days), transfusion rates (13.7 vs. 7.0%), renal failure (3.7 vs. 1.2%), and respiratory failure (15.5 vs. 5.2%) were all worse in the unmatched open group (all p <.01). Propensity matching resulted in 342 laparoscopic and 626 open cases of similar ulcer type, demographics, ASA class, preoperative SIRS/sepsis, hypoalbuminemia, and wound class. Mortality was similar between matched groups (5.0 vs. 3.5%, p =.331). Median length of stay was longer in the open group (6 vs. 5 days, p <.001), which also had higher rates of prolonged ventilation/reintubation (9.6 vs. 5.3%, p =.019) and abdominal wall wound occurrences (6.2 vs. 2.3%, p =.042). Return to the operating room and 30-day readmissions did not differ between the matched groups. Conclusions: Emergent laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer is increasingly being performed, is safe relative to open repair (in patients without preoperative septic shock), and confers a modest benefit in terms of length of stay, respiratory, and abdominal wall wound complications.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)764-772
Number of pages9
JournalSurgical Endoscopy
Issue number3
StatePublished - Mar 15 2019

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2018, Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.


  • Laparoscopic repair
  • Open repair
  • Outcomes
  • Perforated peptic ulcer

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery


Dive into the research topics of 'A comparison of short-term outcomes between laparoscopic and open emergent repair of perforated peptic ulcers'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this