Peptic perforations: comparative study of its closure (omentopexy versus figure of 8 closure)


  • Sanjay Changole Department of General Surgery GMC Nagpur, Maharashtra, India
  • Maheshkumar Soni Department of General Surgery GMC Nagpur, Maharashtra, India
  • Dattatray Thakare Department of General Surgery GMC Nagpur, Maharashtra, India



Peritonitis, Omentopexy, Figure of 8


Background: Peptic ulcer perforation is one the most common and catastrophic maladies that affect mankind. The aim of this study was to compare the surgical techniques of peptic ulcer perforation closure namely omentopexy and figure of 8 stitch with reference to recovery time and complications rate.

Methods: Of 80 selected patients, figure of 8 method for closure of peptic perforation was used in 40 patients and 40 by using omentopexy method. Outcomes were compared in view of postoperative recovery time and postoperative complications such as wound complications, respiratory complications, burst abdomen, septicaemia, hospital stay, death.

Results: In our study it was noted that age of presentation was in elderly males with risk factors like alcohol, smoking, tobacco chewing, and NSAIDS use in decreasing order. Late presentation was associated with higher complication including one death. In figure of 8 group it was found that RT Removal was early, early oral resumption loss hospital stay in figure of 8 group than in omentopexy group. Complications such as wound complication, burst abdomen , leak, and septicaemia  were more in omentopexy group than figure of 8 group. Only one death occurred in study that was in omentopexy group.

Conclusions: We came to conclusion that peptic perforation is more common in males around 50 years with risk factors of smoking and alcohol. Outcomes of surgery with figure of 8 stitch were better than omentopexy with respect to oral resumptions, early discharge, less complications such as wound complications, burst abdomen leak septicaemia and death.

Author Biographies

Sanjay Changole, Department of General Surgery GMC Nagpur, Maharashtra, India

Associate Professor GMC Nagpur

Maheshkumar Soni, Department of General Surgery GMC Nagpur, Maharashtra, India

Assistant Professor Govt. Medical College Nagpur maharashtra

Dattatray Thakare, Department of General Surgery GMC Nagpur, Maharashtra, India

Medical Officer


Yadav D, Garg P. Spectrum of Perforation Peritonitis in Delhi: 77 Cases Experience. Indian J Surg. 2013;75(2):133-7.

Afridi SP, Malik F, Rahman S, Shamim S and Samo K. A Spectrum of perforation peritonitis in Pakistan: 300 cases Eastern experience. World J Emergency Surg. 2008;3:31.

Bali RS, Verma S, Agarwal PN, Singh R, Talwar N. Perforation peritonitis and the developing world. ISRN surgery. 2014 Apr 2;2014.

Malik AA, Wani KA, Dar LA, Wani MA, Wani RA, Parray FQ. Mannheim peritonitis index and APACHE II - Prediction of outcome in patients with peritonitis. Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg. 2010;16(1):27-32.

Agrez MV, Henry DA, Senthiselvan S, Duggan JM. Changing trends in perforated peptic ulcer during the past 45 years. Aust NZ J Surg. 1992;62:729-32.

Bhandari V, Gunasekaran G, Naik D, Paruthy SB, Choudhry L, Garg P. A comparative study between figure of eight suturing technique and omentopexy in closure of peptic ulcer perforation: a prospective study on 60 patients with APACHE II score ≤10. Int Surg J. 2015;2:31-7.

Kishor S, Gupta SP. A study of peptic ulcer perforation with special reference to evaluation of figure of ‘8’ suture technique for closure of peptic ulcer perforation. SAS J. Surg. 2017;3(1):35-40.

Ahmed W, Qureshi H, Alam SE, Zuberi SJ. Perforated duodenal ulcer-a long term follow-up. J Pak Med Assoc. 1990;40(11):258-9.

Jani K, Saena AK, Vaghasia R. Omental plugging for large sized Duodenal Peptic perforation. A prospective randomized study of 100 patients. Southern Med J. 2006;99(5):467-71.

Taj MH, Mohammad D, Qureshi SA. Outcome of omentopexy as primary repair in perforated duodenal ulcer. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 2007 Dec;17(12):731-5.

Svanes C. Trends in perforated peptic ulcer: incidence, etiology, treatment and prognosis. World J Surg. 2000;24:277-83.

Choudhary L, Jyala A, Jha PK, Verma PK, Kiran S. A new and safer surgical technique figure of eight stitch for management of perforated peptic ulcer. J Evolution Med Dent Sci. 2014;3(19):5299-306.

Kocer B, Surmeli S, Solak C, Unal B, Bozkurt B, Yildirim O, et al. Significant factors affecting mortality and morbidity in patients with peptic ulcer perforation. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2007;22:565-70.

Cherian JV, Somasundaram A, Ramalingam S, Jayanthi V. Peptic ulcer disease in India-a 16-year trend analysis. Trop Gastroenterol. 2010;31(4):260-5.

Mukhopadhyay M, Banerjee C, Sarkar S, Roy D, Rahman QM. Comparative study between omentopexy and omental plugging in treatment of giant peptic perforation. Indian J Surg. 2011;73(5):341-5.






Original Research Articles