FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2094149833> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2094149833 endingPage "319" @default.
• W2094149833 startingPage "313" @default.
• W2094149833 abstract "To compare the results of open versus laparoscopic repair for perforated peptic ulcers.Omental patch repair with peritoneal lavage is the mainstay of treatment for perforated peptic ulcers in many institutions. Laparoscopic repair has been used to treat perforated peptic ulcers since 1990, but few randomized studies have been carried out to compare open versus laparoscopic procedures.From January 1994 to June 1997, 130 patients with a clinical diagnosis of perforated peptic ulcer were randomly assigned to undergo either open or laparoscopic omental patch repair. Patients were excluded for a history of upper abdominal surgery, concomitant evidence of bleeding from the ulcer, or gastric outlet obstruction. Patients with clinically sealed-off perforations without signs of peritonitis or sepsis were treated without surgery. Laparoscopic repair would be converted to an open procedure for technical difficulties, nonjuxtapyloric gastric ulcers, or perforations larger than 10 mm. A Gastrografin meal was performed 48 to 72 hours after surgery to document sealing of the perforation. The primary end-point was perioperative parenteral analgesic requirement. Secondary endpoints were operative time, postoperative pain score, length of postoperative hospital stay, complications and deaths, and the date of return to normal daily activities.Nine patients with a surgical diagnosis other than perforated peptic ulcer were excluded; 121 patients entered the final analysis. There were 98 male and 23 female patients recruited, ages 16 to 89 years. The two groups were comparable in age, sex, site and size of perforations, and American Society of Anesthesiology classification. There were nine conversions in the laparoscopic group. After surgery, patients in the laparoscopic group required significantly less parenteral analgesics than those who underwent open repair, and the visual analog pain scores in days 1 and 3 after surgery were significantly lower in the laparoscopic group as well. Laparoscopic repair required significantly less time to complete than open repair. The median postoperative stay was 6 days in the laparoscopic group versus 7 days in the open group. There were fewer chest infections in the laparoscopic group. There were two intraabdominal collections in the laparoscopic group. One patient in the laparoscopic group and three patients in the open group died after surgery.Laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer is a safe and reliable procedure. It was associated with a shorter operating time, less postoperative pain, reduced chest complications, a shorter postoperative hospital stay, and earlier return to normal daily activities than the conventional open repair." @default.
• W2094149833 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2094149833 creator A5007339217 @default.
• W2094149833 creator A5009647511 @default.
• W2094149833 creator A5015146370 @default.
• W2094149833 creator A5035921266 @default.
• W2094149833 creator A5045875382 @default.
• W2094149833 creator A5055750300 @default.
• W2094149833 creator A5074668318 @default.
• W2094149833 creator A5085601786 @default.
• W2094149833 date "2002-03-01" @default.
• W2094149833 modified "2023-10-11" @default.
• W2094149833 title "Laparoscopic Repair for Perforated Peptic Ulcer" @default.
• W2094149833 cites W1604845013 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W1930759567 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W1969822639 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W1971916755 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W1972093793 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W1972422904 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W1982353743 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W1985957492 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W1986076693 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W1991564077 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W2000122714 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W200105166 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W2004390239 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W2010296862 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W2010380016 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W2016048190 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W2019757741 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W2025813930 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W2033711835 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W2047670763 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W2057153333 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W2061077905 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W2063560184 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W2064723112 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W2066472118 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W2067384489 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W2067707756 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W2075029658 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W2075949306 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W2081354771 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W2083225955 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W2092939319 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W2093707458 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W2094393857 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W2152740979 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W2162225051 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W2167780364 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W2315959305 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W2326591042 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W2398602132 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W2399235274 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W2400948616 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W2405484322 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W2411970689 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W3184944085 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W4242894952 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W4244671755 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W4248277133 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W61514712 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W6859048 @default.
• W2094149833 cites W1980976553 @default.
• W2094149833 doi "https://doi.org/10.1097/00000658-200203000-00001" @default.
• W2094149833 hasPubMedCentralId "https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/1422436" @default.
• W2094149833 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11882751" @default.
• W2094149833 hasPublicationYear "2002" @default.
• W2094149833 type Work @default.
• W2094149833 sameAs 2094149833 @default.
• W2094149833 citedByCount "283" @default.
• W2094149833 countsByYear W20941498332012 @default.
• W2094149833 countsByYear W20941498332013 @default.
• W2094149833 countsByYear W20941498332014 @default.
• W2094149833 countsByYear W20941498332015 @default.
• W2094149833 countsByYear W20941498332016 @default.
• W2094149833 countsByYear W20941498332017 @default.
• W2094149833 countsByYear W20941498332018 @default.
• W2094149833 countsByYear W20941498332019 @default.
• W2094149833 countsByYear W20941498332020 @default.
• W2094149833 countsByYear W20941498332021 @default.
• W2094149833 countsByYear W20941498332022 @default.
• W2094149833 countsByYear W20941498332023 @default.
• W2094149833 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2094149833 hasAuthorship W2094149833A5007339217 @default.
• W2094149833 hasAuthorship W2094149833A5009647511 @default.
• W2094149833 hasAuthorship W2094149833A5015146370 @default.
• W2094149833 hasAuthorship W2094149833A5035921266 @default.
• W2094149833 hasAuthorship W2094149833A5045875382 @default.
• W2094149833 hasAuthorship W2094149833A5055750300 @default.
• W2094149833 hasAuthorship W2094149833A5074668318 @default.
• W2094149833 hasAuthorship W2094149833A5085601786 @default.
• W2094149833 hasBestOaLocation W20941498332 @default.
• W2094149833 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W2094149833 hasConcept C168563851 @default.
• W2094149833 hasConcept C191897082 @default.
• W2094149833 hasConcept C192562407 @default.
• W2094149833 hasConcept C203092338 @default.

• next