Comparison of clinical efficacy of laparoscopoic surgery and traditional laparotomy for gastroduodenal perforation repair / 中国现代医生

ABSTRACT

Objective To compare the clinical efficacy of laparoscopoic gastroduodenal perforation repair and tradition-al laparotomic gastroduodenal perforation repair. Methods Clinical information of 64 patients admitted to the surgical department of our hospital from January 2012 to April 2013 who received different approaches of gastroduodenal perfo-ration repair was analyzed respectively, of which 34 patients received laparoscopoic surgery (laparoscopic group) and 30 patients received laparotomic surgery (laparotomic group). The length of hospital stay, hospital costs, operative time, intraoperative blood loss, exhaust time, postoperative usage rate of analgesic drugs and incidence of postoperative com-plications were analyzed comparatively. Results Both groups of patients completed the surgery successfully and were cured and discharged from hospital. None in the laparoscopic group transferred to laparotomy in the middle. The la-parotomic group was lower than the laparoscopic group in the operative time and hospital costs (P<0.05), but the laparo-scopic group was significantly lower than the laparotomic group in the length of hospital stay, intraoperative blood loss, exhaust time, postoperative usage rate of analgesic drugs and incidence of complications (P<0.05). Conclusion In terms of acute gastroduodenal perforation repair, laparoscopoic surgery causes smaller injury, enables faster recovery and has higher safety than traditional laparotomic surgery, thereby worthy of clinical promotion and application.