Surgical Management of Perforated Peptic Ulcer;Closure with Omental Patch versus Definitive Repair with Vagotomy and Gastrojejunostomy: A Comparative Study

Background: The perforation of peptic ulcer is a common and serious life threatening surgical emergency. Up-till now no consensus was reached regarding the best practice in management of perforated peptic ulcer. The aim of this study is to evaluate and compare between both management strategies of perforated peptic ulcer;performing simple closure of the perforation with an omental patch then H. pylori eradication and inhibition of acid secretion using long time proton pump inhibitors versus performing definitive repair of perforated peptic ulcer (closure of the perforation with an omental patch, truncal vagotomy and gastrojejunostomy to discover a proper management strategy of perforated peptic ulcer. Patients and Methods: In the current study we included 30 patients which were divided into 2 groups: group 1 included 15 patients where we managed them by simple closure of the perforation with an omental patch then H. pylori eradication and inhibition of acid secretion using long time proton pump inhibitors and group 2 included 15 patients where we performed closure of the perforation with an omental patch, truncal vagotomy and gastrojejunostomy. Results: We found that younger patient underwent vagotomy and gastro-jejunostomy technique (p Conclusions: Peptic ulcer perforation could be safely managed by primary closure and covering by omentum in addition to medical treatment of H. pylori infection and inhibition of acid secretion especially in old patients with comorbid condition who presented late or with shock.

Simultaneous Repair of Para-Umbilical Hernia during Cesarean Section (CS): A Novel Approach

Background: Pregnant women that are complaining from paraumbilical hernia postpone its repair until they get birth. We hypothesized that it will be better to perform hernia repair of such type of hernia simultaneously during performing cesarean section (CS) which will help to decrease future morbidity re-operation, avoid complications and further skin incision. In this study we aimed to compare the value of performing para-umbilical hernia repair simultaneously during performing CS through the same skin incision with performing para-umbilical hernia repair simultaneously during performing CS through another infra- or supra-umbilical skin incision and performing para-umbilical hernia repair electively later on after healing of a CS skin incision in relation to clinical recovery and patient satisfaction. Patients and Methods: This is a prospective cohort study, where we included 45 pregnant female patients who will give birth by CS, and we have divided them into 3 groups: the first group of patients (A) included 15 patients that undergoing paraumbilical hernia repair by pre-peritoneal mesh insertion through CS incision, the second group of patients (B) in-cluded 15 patients that undergoing paraumbilical hernia repair by infra- or supra-umbilical incision during CS incision and the third group of patients (C) included 15 patients that undergoing paraumbilical hernia repair by infra- or supra-umbilical incision later on after healing of the CS wound. We have evaluated advantages of that novel approach e.g. operation time, severity of pain, peri-partum and post-operative complications, financial cost, duration of hospital stay, clinical recovery, mesh rejection, and patient satisfaction. Results: In group A there is shorter duration of hospital stay, no new skin incision (p 0.002). Conclusions: Performing para-umbilical hernia repair by insertion of a pre-peritoneal mesh simultaneously during performing CS through the same skin incision is the best method of management of para-umbilical hernia in pregnant woman.

A Comparative Study between Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrecomy and Laparoscopic Gastric Bypass in Management of Morbid Obesity

There are several surgical techniques for management of obesity, the most commonly used management strategies were;laparoscopic gastric bypass and laparoscopic sleeve gastrecomy, both techniques have advantages and drawbacks. But there are few published studies which clarified such issue and compare between both management strategies. We aimed in the present study to compare laparoscopic sleeve gastrecomy and laparoscopic gastric bypass as management surgical strategies of morbid obesity regarding technical success, degree of weight loss, degree of weight loss maintenance, postoperative and long term morbidities and degree of presence or absence of nutritional deficiencies. Patients and Methods: This is a prospective study which included a cohort of 100 patients with morbid obesity 50 of them underwent Laparoscopic gastric bypass and performed 50 underwent Laparoscopic sleeve gastrecomy with a five-year follow-up. Results: We showed that weight loss was higher in the laparoscopic sleeve gastrecomy group initially (p = 0.002), then after 2 years total weight loss was higher in the laparoscopic assisted gastric bypass group (p = 0.004). Diabetes, dyslipidemia and hypertension resolution was more common after laparoscopic assisted gastric bypass than after laparoscopic assisted sleeve gastrecomy. Occurrence of nutritional deficiencies was less commonly happened after laparoscopic assisted gastric bypass than after laparoscopic assisted sleeve gastrecomy. Conclusions: We showed a similar rate of weight reduction and resolution of nutritional deficits initially in both between laparoscopic assisted sleeve gastrecomy and laparoscopic gastric bypass maintenance of weight reduction was found more in laparoscopic assisted sleeve gastrecomy but rates of nutritional deficits were higher in such procedure.