Aim. The purpose of this study is to analyze the outcome of elderly patients with perforated peptic ulcer comparing laparoscopic treatment versus open approach.
Methods. In our General and Emergency Surgery Unit in the last 3 years, 20 elderly patients with perforated peptic ulcer were performed. We considered elderly all patients over the age of 65 years (10 females and 10 males; the mean age was 75 years). 16 patients (80%) were submitted to laparoscopic repair with omentoplasty and 4 (20%) to open repair. The patients were classified using the Boye's score which influenced the choice of surgical treatment and the outcoEmergency Romame. The two groups were compared in terms of operative surgery times, complication rate, mortality and postoperative outcomes.
Discussion. Perforated peptic ulcer is a common abdominal disease that is treated by surgery. The potential advantages of laparoscopy, both in terms of diagnosis and therapy, are clear and the major advantages may be observed in cases with peritonitis secondary as a perforated peptic ulcer where laparoscopy allows the confirmation of the diagnosis, the identification of the position of the ulcer and the repair. With the age the risks of comorbidities increases multidisease syndrome. Elderly patients suffer from frailty syndrome. All these factors make the elderly patient a major challenge for a laparoscopy treatment.
Conclusion. The laparoscopic approach is an effective method for treatment of perforated peptic ulcer in the elderly with a great diagnostic and therapeutic role. Nowadays more prospective randomized studies are needed to evaluate the effectiveness of laparoscopic versus open repair.