Cohen JS, Sackier JM: Management

Cohen JS, Sackier JM: Management Selleckchem Copanlisib of colorectal foreign bodies. J R Coll Surg Edinb 1996,41(5):312–315.PubMed 8. Humes D, Lobo DN: Removal of a rectal foreign body by using a Foley catheter passed through a rigid sigmoidoscope. Gastrointest Endosc 2005,62(4):610.PubMedCrossRef 9. Billi P, Bassi M, Ferrara F, Biscardi A, Villani S, Baldoni F, D’Imperio N: Endoscopic removal of a large rectal foreign body using a large balloon dilator: report of a case and description of the technique. Endoscopy 2010, 42:E238.PubMedCrossRef 10. Matsushita M, Shimatani M, Uchida K, Nishio A, Okazaki K: Endoscopic removal of hollow colorectal

foreign bodies with the use of a balloon catheter. Gastrointest Endosc 2009, 69:604–605.PubMedCrossRef 11. Arora S, Ashrafian H, Smock ED, Ng P: Total laparoscopic repair of Vistusertib mw sigmoid foreign body perforation. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A 2009,19(3):401–403.PubMedCrossRef Competing interest The authors declare that they have no competing interests. Authors’ contributions selleckchem AC, NE, SY, conceived of the study and participated in its design and coordination. MY, FC made substantial contributions to data acquisation and conception of manuscript and drafted and designed the manuscript. All authors read and approved the

final manuscript.”
“Introduction Although perforated peptic ulcer disease is a common surgical emergency and a major cause of death in elderly patient controversy still exist regarding its tools of management [1, 2]. Helicobacter pylori (H.P.)

eradication has led to a significant decline in peptic ulcer prevalence [3]. However, the number of patients requiring surgical intervention remains relatively unchanged [4, 5]. Non operative treatment of perforated peptic ulcers was shown to be effective [6]. Nevertheless, the uncertainty in diagnosis, the potential delay for treatment in non responders, and the unreliable response in some patients make it difficult to be applied to all clinical situations. Various surgical techniques had been attempted for the treatment of perforated peptic ulcer (PPU). These Etomidate included stapled omental patch [7], gastroscopy aided insertion of the ligamentum teres [8], or omental plug [9]. Yet, these techniques were either used only in small case series or tend to have high rates of re-operation. Laparoscopic suture closure, initially reported in 1990 [10], was considered to be safe as the open approach. It offers some merits including shorter hospital stay, less postoperative pain, and pulmonary infection with earlier return to normal activities [11]. Currently, the two most commonly accepted laparoscopic procedures for PPU are simple closure with or without an omental patch to cover the repaired ulcer assuming that it may decrease the probability of leakage and provide a further sense of security. The current study was designated to review the results of performing laparoscopic repair of PPU at a single tertiary centre in Saudi Arabia.

Comments are closed.