Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Randomized Controlled Trial
. 2009 Jul;33(7):1368-73.
doi: 10.1007/s00268-009-0054-y.

Randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus open repair of the perforated peptic ulcer: the LAMA Trial

Mariëtta J O E Bertleff  1 , Jens A Halm, Willem A Bemelman, Arie C van der Ham, Erwin van der Harst, Hok I Oei, J F Smulders, E W Steyerberg, Johan F Lange
Affiliations
Randomized Controlled Trial

Randomized clinical trial of laparoscopic versus open repair of the perforated peptic ulcer: the LAMA Trial

Mariëtta J O E Bertleff et al. World J Surg. 2009 Jul.

Abstract

Background: Laparoscopic surgery has become popular during the last decade, mainly because it is associated with fewer postoperative complications than the conventional open approach. It remains unclear, however, if this benefit is observed after laparoscopic correction of perforated peptic ulcer (PPU). The goal of the present study was to evaluate whether laparoscopic closure of a PPU is as safe as conventional open correction.

Methods: The study was based on a randomized controlled trial in which nine medical centers from the Netherlands participated. A total of 109 patients with symptoms of PPU and evidence of air under the diaphragm were scheduled to receive a PPU repair. After exclusion of 8 patients during the operation, outcomes were analyzed for laparotomy (n = 49) and for the laparoscopic procedure (n = 52).

Results: Operating time in the laparoscopy group was significantly longer than in the open group (75 min versus 50 min). Differences regarding postoperative dosage of opiates and the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain scoring system were in favor of the laparoscopic procedure. The VAS score on postoperative days 1, 3, and 7 was significant lower (P < 0.05) in the laparoscopic group. Complications were equally distributed. Hospital stay was also comparable: 6.5 days in the laparoscopic group versus 8.0 days in the open group (P = 0.235).

Conclusions: Laparoscopic repair of PPU is a safe procedure compared with open repair. The results considering postoperative pain favor the laparoscopic procedure.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Patient flow chart
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. {'text': '', 'ref_index': 1, 'ids': [{'type': 'DOI', 'value': '10.1001/archsurg.140.2.201', 'is_inner': False, 'url': 'https://doi.org/10.1001/archsurg.140.2.201'}, {'type': 'PubMed', 'value': '15724004', 'is_inner': True, 'url': 'https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15724004/'}]}
    2. Behrman SW (2005) Management of complicated peptic ulcer disease. Arch Surg 140:201–208 - PubMed
    1. {'text': '', 'ref_index': 1, 'ids': [{'type': 'DOI', 'value': '10.1007/s002689910045', 'is_inner': False, 'url': 'https://doi.org/10.1007/s002689910045'}, {'type': 'PubMed', 'value': '10658061', 'is_inner': True, 'url': 'https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10658061/'}]}
    2. Svanes C (2000) Trends in perforated peptic ulcer: incidence, etiology, treatment, and prognosis. World J Surg 24:277–283 - PubMed
    1. {'text': '', 'ref_index': 1, 'ids': [{'type': 'DOI', 'value': '10.1007/s00268-005-7705-4', 'is_inner': False, 'url': 'https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-005-7705-4'}, {'type': 'PubMed', 'value': '16132404', 'is_inner': True, 'url': 'https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16132404/'}]}
    2. Lunevicius R, Morkevicius M (2005) Management strategies, early results, benefits and risk factors of laparoscopic repair of perforated peptic ulcer. World J Surg 29:1299–1310 - PubMed
    1. {'text': '', 'ref_index': 1, 'ids': [{'type': 'DOI', 'value': '10.1097/00004836-200309000-00007', 'is_inner': False, 'url': 'https://doi.org/10.1097/00004836-200309000-00007'}, {'type': 'PubMed', 'value': '12960721', 'is_inner': True, 'url': 'https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12960721/'}]}
    2. Seelig MH, Seelig SK, Behr C et al (2003) Comparison between open and laparoscopic technique in the management of perforated gastroduodenal ulcers. J Clin Gastroenterol 3:226–229 - PubMed
    1. {'text': '', 'ref_index': 1, 'ids': [{'type': 'DOI', 'value': '10.1007/s00423-005-0569-0', 'is_inner': False, 'url': 'https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-005-0569-0'}, {'type': 'PubMed', 'value': '16041553', 'is_inner': True, 'url': 'https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16041553/'}]}
    2. Lunevicius R, Morkevicius M (2005) Risk factors influencing the early outcome results after laparoscopic repair of perforated duodenal ulcer and their predictive value. Langenbecks Arch Surg 390:413–420 - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms