Primary peritoneal drainage in critically ill patients of perforation peritonitis (an experience of 60 cases)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2349-2902.isj20172407Keywords:
Critically ill, Primary peritoneal drainage, Perforation peritonitisAbstract
Background: Objective of the present study was to evaluate applicability of Primary Peritoneal Drainage (PPD) under LA in critically ill patients as pre-laparotomy support when laparotomy under GA could not be done. Also to assess outcome in terms of survival, patients needing definitive surgery and complications associated with the procedure on immediate and follow up basis.
Methods: A prospective designed study including 60 critically ill patients admitted and diagnosed as perforation peritonitis were subjected to PPD under LA as per inclusion and exclusion criteria, at GMC Jammu, Jammu and Kashmir, India from November 2013 to October 2015.
Results: The average age of patients was 53.43 years (20-80 years) with M:F ration of 7:3. All patients presented in shock with very high ASA, combined and MPI scores. 40 patients died after PPD/laparotomy and 20 patients survived. From amongst survivors, 08 (40%) patients required no further treatment and 12 (60%) survivors required definitive laparotomy and treatment of the cause. Overall mortality was 66.67%, attributed to extraordinary delay in presentation, old age, High ASA and other score.
Conclusions: From the present study it was concluded that in adults the procedure did not proved comparable to standard surgical intervention as definite procedure but it did proved to be an effective modality of resuscitation and patient stabilization unlike in NEC of infants; PPD under LA. Overall the procedure is a low cost intervention and provide cheaper alternative to sustain and improvise the status of patient with a possibility of widespread applicability in low resource situations provided interdepartmental support from ICU, Dialysis and CCU is available.
Metrics
References
Bali RS, Verma S, Agarwal PN, Singh R, Talwar N. Perforation peritonitis and the developing world. ISRN Surg. 2014;2014:105492.
Ramakrishnan K, Salinas RC. Peptic ulcer disease. Am Fam Phys. 2007;1(7697):1005-12.
Dorairajan LN, Gupta S, Deo SVS, Chumber S, Sharma L. Peritonitis in India-A decades experience. Trop Gastroenterol. 1995;16(1):33-8.
Sharma L, Gupta S, Soin AS, Sikora S, Kapoor V. Generalized peritonitis in India. The Tropical Spectrum. Japan J Surg. 1991;21(3):272-7.
Ahmad MM, Wani M, Dar HM, Thakur SA, Wani HA, Mir IN. Spectrum of perforation peritonitis in Kashmir: a prospective study at our tertiary care centre. Int Surg J. 2015;2(3):381-4.
Taylor H. The non-surgical treatment of perforated peptic ulcer. Gastroenterology. 1957;33:353-68.
Donovan A, Berne T, Donovan J. Perforated duodenal ulcer: an alternative therapeutic plan. Arch Surg. 1998;133:1166-71.
Nusree R. Conservative management of perforated peptic ulcer. Thai J Surg. 2005;26:5-8.
Sedov VM, Izbasarov RZH, Strizheletskiĭ VV, Rutenburg GM, Luchkin AN. Programmed sanation laparoscopy in treatment of peritonitis. Vestnik Khirurgii Imeni I. I. Grekova. 2008;167(1):88-91.
Taylor H. Perforated acute and chronic peptic ulcer; conservative treatment. Lancet. 1956;270:397-9.
Leppäniemi AK. Laparostomy: why and when? Leppäniemi Crit Care. 2010;14:216.
Ein SH, Marshall DG, Gervan D. Peritoneal drainage under local anesthesia for perforations from necrotizing enterocolitis. J Pediatr Surg. 1977;12:963-7.
Rahman MM, Al Mamun A, Hossain MD, Das MK. Peptic ulcer perforation: management of high risk cases by percutaneous abdominal drainage. Trop Doct. 2005;35:1-30.
Boermeester MA. Surgical approaches to peritonitis. Br J Surg. 2007;94:1317-8.
Robledo FA, Luque-de-León E, Suárez R, Sánchez P, de-la-Fuente M, Vargas A, et al. Open versus closed management of the abdomen in the surgical treatment of severe secondary peritonitis: a randomized clinical trial. Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2007;8:63-72.
Noetzel W. The operative treatment of diffuse purulent peritonitis. Negotiations of the German Society of Surgeons. 1908;34:638-707.
Kirchner M. Treatment of acute purulent free abdominal arthritis. Langenb Arch Chir. 1926;142:53-267.
Ein SH, Marshall DG, Gervan D. Peritoneal drainage under local anesthesia for perforations from necrotizing enterocolitis. J Pediatr Surg. 1977;12:963-7.
Moss RL, Dimmitt RA, Henry MCW, Geraghty N, Efron B. A Meta-Analysis of Peritoneal Drainage versus Laparotomy for Perforated Necrotizing Enterocolitis. J Pediatr Surg. 2001;36(8):1210-3.
Moss RL, Dimmitt RA, Barnhart DC, Sylvester KG, Brown RL, Powell DM, et al. Laparotomy versus peritoneal drainage for necrotizing enter colitis and perforation. N Engl J Med. 2006;355(8):856.
Zenciroğlu A, Çakmak Ö, Demirel N, Baş AY, Yılmaz D, Karaman I, et al. Outcome of primary peritoneal drainage for perforated necrotizing enterocolitis: comparison between laparotomy and drainage. Eur J Pediatr Surg. 2005;15(04):243-7.
Saber A, Gad MA, Ellabban GM. Perforated duodenal ulcer in high risk patients: is percutaneous drainage justified? North Am J Med Sci. 2012;4(1):132-5.
Baloch I, Shaikh A, Shaikh SF. Pre-operative peritoneal drainage as a part of resuscitation in severe peritonitis. J Pak Med Assoc. 2013;63(7):919-20.
Jhobta RS, Attri AK, Kaushik R, Sharma R, Jhobta A. Spectrum of perforation peritonitis in India-review of 504 consecutive cases. World J Emerg Surg. 2006;1:26.
Bucher P, Oulhaci W, Morel P, Ris F, Huber O. Results of conservative treatment for perforated gastroduodenal ulcer in patients not eligible for surgical repair. Swiss Med Wkly. 2007;137:337-40.
Singh R, Kumar N, Bhattacharya A, Vajifdar H. Preoperative predictors of mortality in adult patients with perforation peritonitis. Indian J Crit Care Med. 2011;15(3):157-63.
Nusree R. Conservative management of perforated peptic ulcer. Thai J Surg. 2005;26:5-8.
Hanumanthappa MB, Gopinathan S, Rai GD, Dsouza N. A non-operative treatment of perforated peptic ulcer: a prospective study with 50 cases. J Clin Diagn Res. 2012;6(4):696-9.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
