Search In this Thesis
   Search In this Thesis  
العنوان
Meta Analysis of Laparoscopic versus Open Repair for Perforated Peptic Ulcer
الناشر
Faculty of medicine
المؤلف
Alsadeq,Mohamed Alsadeq Ahmed
هيئة الاعداد
مشرف / محمد الصادق احمد
مشرف / أ.د/ خالد عبدالله الفقي
مشرف / د/ عمرو محمد الحفني
مشرف / د/ احمد عادل عين شوكه
الموضوع
Peptic Ulcer laparoscopy Open Repai Perforated Peptic Ulcer
تاريخ النشر
2018
عدد الصفحات
188 P.
اللغة
الإنجليزية
الدرجة
ماجستير
التخصص
جراحة
تاريخ الإجازة
1/1/2018
مكان الإجازة
جامعة عين شمس - كلية الطب - الجراحه العامه
الفهرس
Only 14 pages are availabe for public view

from 188

from 188

Abstract

With the development of recognition about the pathogenesis of peptic ulcer disease, and the widespread eradication of helicobacter pylori, the prophylactic use of proton-pump inhibitors and the rational use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, the disease incidence has drastically decreased in the past few decades. However, the incidence of perforated peptic ulcer, one of the major complications of peptic ulcer disease, has not significantly decreased, and it is also a common disease in surgical emergency. It is reported that peptic ulcer disease may have short-term morbidity in up to 50% of patients and mortality in up to 30% respectively, threatening seriously the health and life of human being. Therefore, it is along-standing interest to explore effective treatments for peptic ulcer disease in modern surgery. In clinical practice, emergency surgery is usually required when patients suffer from peptic ulcer disease. As we know, there are two kinds of surgical procedures available for patients to choose: open abdominal surgery and laparoscopic surgery. The present study reviews the current literature to identify the highest-quality studies and performs a comparative analysis of the clinical outcomes in laparoscopic and open sutured treatment of peptic ulcer perforation. A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was undertaken to examine the relative risks of morbidity and mortality for both the laparoscopic and open approaches. Published observational studies (randomized control trials and clinical control trials), Participant will be patients that had done repairing of perforated peptic ulcer, Laparoscopic verses open repair of perforated peptic ulcer. The MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the outcomes of laparoscopic and open repair for perforated peptic ulcer between January 2000 and december 2017. Keywords used in the search were “laparoscopy/laparoscopic”, “open/ conventional”, “peptic ulcer/duodenal ulcer/gastric ulcer”, “repair/surgery/closure”, and their combinations. To avoid overlooking other studies, the search was also maximized through manually screening the references of identified articles and relevant reviews.