Graham’s patch omentopexy versus modified Graham’s patch omentopexy in duodenal perforation – A comparative study

Authors

  • Atul Kumar Khare Senior Resident, Department of Paediatrics Surgery, SMS Medical College, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8869-5614
  • Kuldip Pratap Patel Associate Professor, Department of General Surgery, Birsa Munda Government Medical College, Shahdol, Madhya Pradesh, India
  • Ashok Kumar Chopra Senior Resident, Department of Paediatrics Surgery, SMS Medical College, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India
  • Pankaj Goyal Senior Resident, Department of Paediatrics Surgery, SMS Medical College, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India
  • Ashish Paliwal Senior Resident, Department of Paediatrics Surgery, SMS Medical College, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India
  • Aditya J Baindur Senior Resident, Department of Paediatrics Surgery, SMS Medical College, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India
  • Kirti Singh Ex. Senior Resident, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Birsa Munda Government Medical College, Shahdol, Madhya Pradesh, India
  • Ravi Pratap Singh Senior Resident, Department of Surgical Gastroenterology, Bhopal Memorial Hospital and Research Centre, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3126/ajms.v15i8.66487

Keywords:

Perforation peritonitis; Exploratory laparotomy; Wound dehiscence

Abstract

Background: Peptic ulcer perforation is a serious complication which affects 2–10% of peptic ulcer patients. Peptic ulcer perforation presents with an overall mortality of 10% although various authors had reported incidence between 1.3% and 20%. Being a life-threatening complication of peptic ulcer disease, it needs special attention with prompt resuscitation and appropriate surgical management if morbidity and mortality are to be contained.

Aims and Objectives: The aim of the study was to the comparative study of Graham’s omentopexy versus modified Graham’s omentopexy in duodenal perforation.

Materials and Methods: This prospective and single-center study was done in Birsa Munda, GMC Shahdol Madhya Pradesh from 2021 to 2023 for 2 years of periods. A total of 160 patients divided into two groups-Graham’s omentopexy 80 cases group “A” and modified Graham’s omentopexy 80 cases group “B.”

Results: One hundred and forty-six (91%) were male and 14 (9%) were female with M:F Ratio 10:1. Most of the patients were 20–78 years of age in both groups. Post-operative leakage was 7.5% and 1.25%, respectively. Mortality rate in Group A (3.75%) and in Group B (1.25%). The overall mortality rate was 7.14%. In this study, average hospital stay was 12.4 days in Group A and 9.0 days in Group B.

Conclusion: This study showed that modified Graham’s patch repair is as effective as Graham’s patch repair in terms of the mean operative time period, the timing of oral feed allow, and mean hospital stay timing.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
Abstract
39
PDF
14

Downloads

Published

2024-08-03

How to Cite

Atul Kumar Khare, Kuldip Pratap Patel, Ashok Kumar Chopra, Pankaj Goyal, Ashish Paliwal, Aditya J Baindur, Kirti Singh, & Ravi Pratap Singh. (2024). Graham’s patch omentopexy versus modified Graham’s patch omentopexy in duodenal perforation – A comparative study. Asian Journal of Medical Sciences, 15(8), 156–161. https://doi.org/10.3126/ajms.v15i8.66487

Issue

Vol. 15 No. 8 (2024)

Section

Original Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2024 Asian Journal of Medical Sciences

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. The journal holds copyright and publishes the work under a Creative Commons CC-BY-NC license that permits use, distribution and reprduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes. The journal should be recognised as the original publisher of this work.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).