Pang YF, Shu L, Xia CW. Retrospective comparative study of different surgical methods for gastric ulcer perforation: Efficacy and postoperative complications. World J Gastrointest Surg 2025; 17(2): 101896 [DOI: 10.4240/wjgs.v17.i2.101896]
Corresponding Author of This Article
Yu-Fan Pang, Department of Thyroid Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University, No. 25 Taiping Street, Luzhou 646000, Sichuan Province, China. 1917515053@qq.com
Research Domain of This Article
Gastroenterology & Hepatology
Article-Type of This Article
Retrospective Study
Open-Access Policy of This Article
This article is an open-access article which was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
World J Gastrointest Surg. Feb 27, 2025; 17(2): 101896 Published online Feb 27, 2025. doi: 10.4240/wjgs.v17.i2.101896
Retrospective comparative study of different surgical methods for gastric ulcer perforation: Efficacy and postoperative complications
Yu-Fan Pang, Liang Shu, Cheng-Wei Xia
Yu-Fan Pang, Liang Shu, Cheng-Wei Xia, Department of Thyroid Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University, Luzhou 646000, Sichuan Province, China
Author contributions: Pang YF and Shu L contributed to the concept of this study was jointly proposed, and participated in data collection; Pang YF drafted the initial draft; Shu L contributed to the formal analysis of this study; Pang YF and Xia CW guided the research, methodology, and visualization of the manuscript; Shu L, Pang YF, and Xia CW participated in this study and validated it; All authors have read and approved the final manuscript.
Institutional review board statement: This study has been reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Committee of the Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University, with the ethical review number No. XNYK-2022-052.
Informed consent statement: Consent was obtained from the patients and their guardians, and an informed consent form was signed.
Conflict-of-interest statement: The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Data sharing statement: No data available.
Open Access: This article is an open-access article that was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: https://creativecommons.org/Licenses/by-nc/4.0/
Corresponding author: Yu-Fan Pang, Department of Thyroid Surgery, Affiliated Hospital of Southwest Medical University, No. 25 Taiping Street, Luzhou 646000, Sichuan Province, China. 1917515053@qq.com
Received: November 7, 2024 Revised: December 4, 2024 Accepted: December 17, 2024 Published online: February 27, 2025 Processing time: 76 Days and 2.2 Hours
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Gastric ulcer perforation is a critical condition that can lead to significant morbidity and mortality if not promptly addressed. It is often the result of chronic peptic ulcer disease, which is characterized by a breach in the gastric wall due to ulceration. Surgical intervention is essential for managing this life-threatening complication. However, the optimal surgical technique remains debatable among clinicians. Various methods have been employed, including simple closure, omental patch repair, and partial gastrectomy, each with distinct advantages and disadvantages. Understanding the comparative efficacy and postoperative outcomes of these techniques is crucial for improving patient care and surgical decision-making. This study addresses the need for a comprehensive analysis in this area.
AIM
To compare the efficacy and postoperative complications of different surgical methods for the treatment of gastric ulcer perforation.
METHODS
A retrospective analysis was conducted on 120 patients who underwent surgery for gastric ulcer perforation between September 2020 and June 2023. The patients were divided into three groups based on the surgical method: Simple closure, omental patch repair, and partial gastrectomy. The primary outcomes were the operative success rate and incidence of postoperative complications. Secondary outcomes included the length of hospital stay, recovery time, and long-term quality of life.
RESULTS
The operative success rates for simple closure, omental patch repair, and partial gastrectomy were 92.5%, 95%, and 97.5%, respectively. Postoperative complications occurred in 20%, 15%, and 17.5% of patients in each group, respectively. The partial gastrectomy group showed a significantly longer operative time (P < 0.001) but the lowest rate of ulcer recurrence (2.5%, P < 0.05). The omental patch repair group demonstrated the shortest hospital stay (mean 7.2 days, P < 0.05) and fastest recovery time.
CONCLUSION
While all three surgical methods showed high success rates, omental patch repair demonstrated the best overall outcomes, with a balance of high efficacy, low complication rates, and shorter recovery time. However, the choice of the surgical method should be tailored to individual patient factors and the surgeon’s expertise.
Core Tip: This study evaluated three surgical techniques for gastric ulcer perforation: Simple closure, omental patch repair, and partial gastrectomy. While all methods are effective, omental patch repair offers the best balance of efficacy, lower complication rates, and quicker recovery. These findings emphasize the importance of tailoring surgical choices according to individual patient needs and surgeon experience.
