Laparoscopic and conventional closure of perforated peptic ulcer : A comparison
After the first successful laparoscopic closure of a perforated peptic ulcer in 1990, 18 patients with laparoscopic closure were compared to 16 patients with conventional surgery. The endpoint adverse events (complications), pain intensity, operation time, fever, leucocytosis, and duration of hospit...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Surgical endoscopy 1996-08, Vol.10 (8), p.831-836 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 836 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 8 |
| container_start_page | 831 |
| container_title | Surgical endoscopy |
| container_volume | 10 |
| creator | MISEREZ, M EYPASCH, E SPANGENBERGER, W LEFERING, R TROIDL, H |
| description | After the first successful laparoscopic closure of a perforated peptic ulcer in 1990, 18 patients with laparoscopic closure were compared to 16 patients with conventional surgery.
The endpoint adverse events (complications), pain intensity, operation time, fever, leucocytosis, and duration of hospital stay showed no clinically relevant differences.
Consumption of analgesics was lower in the laparoscopic group.
Laparoscopic closure of perforated peptic ulcer is technically feasible. The safety of the method and the benefit for the patient need proof by means of a randomized controlled trial. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/BF00189544 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_78258456</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>78258456</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c185t-d3a39aff161e61ddf761a86a3f01052ad57ae2bd0fc0235c40c60e087a23a3543</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpFkM1LxDAQxYMo67p68S70IB6E6uSrTbyti6vCwl70XGbTBCrdpiat4H9vZIueZuD93hvmEXJJ4Y4ClPePawCqtBTiiMyp4CxnjKpjMgfNIWelFqfkLMYPABCayhmZqUILLdScbDfYY_DR-L4xGXZ1Znz3Zbuh8R22mWl9HIPNvMt6G5wPONg6rf2Q6LE1NmQP2TJ59imlib47JycO22gvprkg7-unt9VLvtk-v66Wm9xQJYe85sg1OkcLagta164sKKoCuQMKkmEtS7RsV4MzwLg0AkwBFlSJLDml4Atyc8jtg_8cbRyqfRONbVvsrB9jVSomlZBFAm8PoElfxmBd1Ydmj-G7olD9tlf9t5fgqyl13O1t_YdOdSX9etIxGmxdwM408Q_jNF3Vgv8Adjd2Tg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>78258456</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Laparoscopic and conventional closure of perforated peptic ulcer : A comparison</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>MISEREZ, M ; EYPASCH, E ; SPANGENBERGER, W ; LEFERING, R ; TROIDL, H</creator><creatorcontrib>MISEREZ, M ; EYPASCH, E ; SPANGENBERGER, W ; LEFERING, R ; TROIDL, H</creatorcontrib><description>After the first successful laparoscopic closure of a perforated peptic ulcer in 1990, 18 patients with laparoscopic closure were compared to 16 patients with conventional surgery.
The endpoint adverse events (complications), pain intensity, operation time, fever, leucocytosis, and duration of hospital stay showed no clinically relevant differences.
Consumption of analgesics was lower in the laparoscopic group.
Laparoscopic closure of perforated peptic ulcer is technically feasible. The safety of the method and the benefit for the patient need proof by means of a randomized controlled trial.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0930-2794</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1432-2218</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/BF00189544</identifier><identifier>PMID: 8694948</identifier><identifier>CODEN: SUREEX</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York, NY: Springer</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Biological and medical sciences ; Duodenal Ulcer - complications ; Female ; Humans ; Laparoscopy - methods ; Length of Stay ; Male ; Medical sciences ; Middle Aged ; Peptic Ulcer Perforation - etiology ; Peptic Ulcer Perforation - surgery ; Postoperative Complications ; Retrospective Studies ; Stomach Ulcer - complications ; Stomach, duodenum, intestine, rectum, anus ; Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases ; Surgery of the digestive system ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>Surgical endoscopy, 1996-08, Vol.10 (8), p.831-836</ispartof><rights>1996 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,27929,27930</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=3182594$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8694948$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>MISEREZ, M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>EYPASCH, E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SPANGENBERGER, W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>LEFERING, R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>TROIDL, H</creatorcontrib><title>Laparoscopic and conventional closure of perforated peptic ulcer : A comparison</title><title>Surgical endoscopy</title><addtitle>Surg Endosc</addtitle><description>After the first successful laparoscopic closure of a perforated peptic ulcer in 1990, 18 patients with laparoscopic closure were compared to 16 patients with conventional surgery.
The endpoint adverse events (complications), pain intensity, operation time, fever, leucocytosis, and duration of hospital stay showed no clinically relevant differences.
Consumption of analgesics was lower in the laparoscopic group.
Laparoscopic closure of perforated peptic ulcer is technically feasible. The safety of the method and the benefit for the patient need proof by means of a randomized controlled trial.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Duodenal Ulcer - complications</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Laparoscopy - methods</subject><subject>Length of Stay</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Peptic Ulcer Perforation - etiology</subject><subject>Peptic Ulcer Perforation - surgery</subject><subject>Postoperative Complications</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Stomach Ulcer - complications</subject><subject>Stomach, duodenum, intestine, rectum, anus</subject><subject>Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases</subject><subject>Surgery of the digestive system</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>0930-2794</issn><issn>1432-2218</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1996</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpFkM1LxDAQxYMo67p68S70IB6E6uSrTbyti6vCwl70XGbTBCrdpiat4H9vZIueZuD93hvmEXJJ4Y4ClPePawCqtBTiiMyp4CxnjKpjMgfNIWelFqfkLMYPABCayhmZqUILLdScbDfYY_DR-L4xGXZ1Znz3Zbuh8R22mWl9HIPNvMt6G5wPONg6rf2Q6LE1NmQP2TJ59imlib47JycO22gvprkg7-unt9VLvtk-v66Wm9xQJYe85sg1OkcLagta164sKKoCuQMKkmEtS7RsV4MzwLg0AkwBFlSJLDml4Atyc8jtg_8cbRyqfRONbVvsrB9jVSomlZBFAm8PoElfxmBd1Ydmj-G7olD9tlf9t5fgqyl13O1t_YdOdSX9etIxGmxdwM408Q_jNF3Vgv8Adjd2Tg</recordid><startdate>199608</startdate><enddate>199608</enddate><creator>MISEREZ, M</creator><creator>EYPASCH, E</creator><creator>SPANGENBERGER, W</creator><creator>LEFERING, R</creator><creator>TROIDL, H</creator><general>Springer</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>199608</creationdate><title>Laparoscopic and conventional closure of perforated peptic ulcer : A comparison</title><author>MISEREZ, M ; EYPASCH, E ; SPANGENBERGER, W ; LEFERING, R ; TROIDL, H</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c185t-d3a39aff161e61ddf761a86a3f01052ad57ae2bd0fc0235c40c60e087a23a3543</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1996</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Duodenal Ulcer - complications</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Laparoscopy - methods</topic><topic>Length of Stay</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Peptic Ulcer Perforation - etiology</topic><topic>Peptic Ulcer Perforation - surgery</topic><topic>Postoperative Complications</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Stomach Ulcer - complications</topic><topic>Stomach, duodenum, intestine, rectum, anus</topic><topic>Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases</topic><topic>Surgery of the digestive system</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>MISEREZ, M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>EYPASCH, E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>SPANGENBERGER, W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>LEFERING, R</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>TROIDL, H</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Surgical endoscopy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>MISEREZ, M</au><au>EYPASCH, E</au><au>SPANGENBERGER, W</au><au>LEFERING, R</au><au>TROIDL, H</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Laparoscopic and conventional closure of perforated peptic ulcer : A comparison</atitle><jtitle>Surgical endoscopy</jtitle><addtitle>Surg Endosc</addtitle><date>1996-08</date><risdate>1996</risdate><volume>10</volume><issue>8</issue><spage>831</spage><epage>836</epage><pages>831-836</pages><issn>0930-2794</issn><eissn>1432-2218</eissn><coden>SUREEX</coden><abstract>After the first successful laparoscopic closure of a perforated peptic ulcer in 1990, 18 patients with laparoscopic closure were compared to 16 patients with conventional surgery.
The endpoint adverse events (complications), pain intensity, operation time, fever, leucocytosis, and duration of hospital stay showed no clinically relevant differences.
Consumption of analgesics was lower in the laparoscopic group.
Laparoscopic closure of perforated peptic ulcer is technically feasible. The safety of the method and the benefit for the patient need proof by means of a randomized controlled trial.</abstract><cop>New York, NY</cop><pub>Springer</pub><pmid>8694948</pmid><doi>10.1007/BF00189544</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0930-2794 |
| ispartof | Surgical endoscopy, 1996-08, Vol.10 (8), p.831-836 |
| issn | 0930-2794 1432-2218 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_78258456 |
| source | MEDLINE; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings |
| subjects | Adult Aged Aged, 80 and over Biological and medical sciences Duodenal Ulcer - complications Female Humans Laparoscopy - methods Length of Stay Male Medical sciences Middle Aged Peptic Ulcer Perforation - etiology Peptic Ulcer Perforation - surgery Postoperative Complications Retrospective Studies Stomach Ulcer - complications Stomach, duodenum, intestine, rectum, anus Surgery (general aspects). Transplantations, organ and tissue grafts. Graft diseases Surgery of the digestive system Treatment Outcome |
| title | Laparoscopic and conventional closure of perforated peptic ulcer : A comparison |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-11T14%3A16%3A04IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Laparoscopic%20and%20conventional%20closure%20of%20perforated%20peptic%20ulcer%20:%20A%20comparison&rft.jtitle=Surgical%20endoscopy&rft.au=MISEREZ,%20M&rft.date=1996-08&rft.volume=10&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=831&rft.epage=836&rft.pages=831-836&rft.issn=0930-2794&rft.eissn=1432-2218&rft.coden=SUREEX&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/BF00189544&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E78258456%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=78258456&rft_id=info:pmid/8694948&rfr_iscdi=true |