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
. 2011:4:283-9.
doi: 10.2147/CEG.S25501. Epub 2011 Dec 9.

Diagnostic indicators for peptic ulcer perforation at a tertiary care hospital in Thailand

Affiliations

Diagnostic indicators for peptic ulcer perforation at a tertiary care hospital in Thailand

Chutikarn Suriya et al. Clin Exp Gastroenterol. 2011.

Abstract

Introduction: Limited data currently exists regarding the diagnostic indicators of peptic ulcer perforation for early detection among patients in Thailand. Delayed diagnosis and treatment for an ulcer can be life-threatening, resulting in shock or death.

Objective: To determine the diagnostic indicators of peptic ulcer perforation.

Material and methods: A cohort study was conducted in a tertiary care hospital in Thailand from 2005 to 2009. Peptic ulcer patients aged 15 years and over admitted to the surgical department were included. The diagnostic indicators used criteria of the patients' final diagnoses and operations, coded according to the International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, 10th Revision, which included patient profiles, gender, age, coexisting illnesses, personal habits, signs and symptoms, laboratory investigations, radiological finding, and treatment role. Exponential risk regression analyses to obtain relative risk (RR) estimates for diagnostic indicators were analyzed using Stata(®) statistical software package, version 11 (StataCorp LP, College Station, TX).

Results: The study included 1290 patients. Of these, 57% reported perforated peptic ulcer. Multivariate analysis showed five diagnostic indicators: signs and symptoms including intense abdominal pain (RR = 1.53, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.14-2.06), tenderness (RR = 1.94, 95% CI 1.17-3.21), and guarding (RR = 1.52, 95% CI 1.05-2.20); X-ray with free air (RR = 2.80, 95% CI 2.08-3.77); and referral from other hospitals (RR = 1.37, 95% CI 1.03-1.82).

Conclusion: Five diagnostic indicators for peptic ulcer perforation monitoring were suggested from this study. Improving diagnostic indicators for medical care may improve the outcome of patients that have perforated peptic ulcer.

Keywords: Thailand; diagnostic indicator; peptic ulcer perforation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Higham J, Kang JY, Majeed A. Recent trends in admissions and mortality due to peptic ulcer in England: increasing frequency of haemorrhage among older subjects. Gut. 2002;50(4):460–464. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lange A. Stomach and duodenum. In: Way LW, editor. Current Surgical Diagnosis and Treatment. 10th ed. Norwalk, CT: Appleton and Lange; 1994. pp. 437–459.
    1. Noguiera C, Silva AS, Santos JN, et al. Perforated peptic ulcer: main factors of morbidity and mortality. World J Surg. 2003;27(7):782–787. - PubMed
    1. Akarca US. Gastrointestinal effects of selective and non-selective non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Curr Pharm Des. 2005;11(14):1779–1793. - PubMed
    1. Kocer B, Surmeli S, Solak C, et al. Factors affecting mortality and morbidity in patients with peptic ulcer perforation. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2007;22(4):565–570. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources