SummaryPerforated peptic ulcer (PPU) is a frequent emergency condition worldwide with associated mortality up to 30%. A paucity of studies on PPU limits the knowledge base for clinical decision-making, but a few randomised trials are available. While Helicobacter pylori and use of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are frequent causes of PPU, demographic differences in age, gender, perforation location and aetiology exist between countries, as do mortality rates. Clinical prediction rules are used, but accuracy varies with study population. Early surgery, either by laparoscopic or open repair, and proper sepsis management are essential for good outcome. Selected patients can perhaps be managed non-operatively or with novel endoscopic approaches, but validation in trials is needed. Quality of care, sepsis care-bundles and postoperative monitoring need further evaluation. Adequate trials with low risk of bias are urgently needed for better evidence. Here we summarize the evidence for PPU management and identify directions for future clinical research.

The adjusted incidence rate, seasonal distribution and mortality rate was stable. PPU frequently presents outside regular work-hours. Increase in incidence and mortality occurs with older age.

IntroductionWhile the laparoscopic treatment of perforated peptic ulcers (PPU) has been shown to be feasible and safe, its implementation into routine clinical practice has been slow. Only a few studies have evaluated its overall utility. The aim of this study was to investigate changes in surgical management of PPU and associated outcomes.Material and MethodsThe study was a retrospective, single institution, population-based review of all patients undergoing surgery for PPU between 2003 and 2009. Patient demographics, diagnostic evaluation, management, and outcomes were evaluated.ResultsIncluded were 114 patients with a median age of 67 years (range, 20–100). Women comprised 59% and were older (p < 0.001), had more comorbidities (p = 0.002), and had a higher Boey risk score (p = 0.036) compared to men. Perforation location was gastric/pyloric in 72% and duodenal in 28% of patients. Pneumoperitoneum was diagnosed by plain abdominal x-ray in 30 of 41 patients (75%) and by abdominal computerized tomography (CT) in 76 of 77 patients (98%; p < 0.001).Laparoscopic treatment was initiated in 48 patients (42%) and completed in 36 patients (75% of attempted cases). Laparoscopic treatment rate increased from 7% to 46% during the study period (p = 0.02). Median operation time was shorter in patients treated via laparotomy (70 min) compared to laparoscopy (82 min) and those converted from laparoscopy to laparotomy (105 min; p = 0.017). Postoperative complications occurred in 56 patients (49%). Overall 30-day postoperative mortality was 16%. No statistically significant differences were found in morbidity and mortality between open versus laparoscopic repair.ConclusionThis study demonstrates an increased use of CT as the primary diagnostic tool for PPU and of laparoscopic repair in its surgical treatment. These changes in management are not associated with altered outcomes.

BackgroundMortality rates in perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) have remained unchanged. The aim of this study was to compare known clinical factors and three scoring systems (American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA), Boey and peptic ulcer perforation (PULP)) in the ability to predict mortality in PPU.Material and MethodsThis is a consecutive, observational cohort study of patients surgically treated for perforated peptic ulcer over a decade (January 2001 through December 2010). Primary outcome was 30-day mortality.ResultsA total of 172 patients were included, of whom 28 (16 %) died within 30 days. Among the factors associated with mortality, the PULP score had an odds ratio (OR) of 18.6 and the ASA score had an OR of 11.6, both with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.79. The Boey score had an OR of 5.0 and an AUC of 0.75. Hypoalbuminaemia alone (≤37 g/l) achieved an OR of 8.7 and an AUC of 0.78. In multivariable regression, mortality was best predicted by a combination of increasing age, presence of active cancer and delay from admission to surgery of >24 h, together with hypoalbuminaemia, hyperbilirubinaemia and increased creatinine values, for a model AUC of 0.89.ConclusionSix clinical factors predicted 30-day mortality better than available risk scores. Hypoalbuminaemia was the strongest single predictor of mortality and may be included for improved risk estimation.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s11605-014-2485-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.