Omental patch repair effectively treats perforated marginal ulcer following Roux-en-Y gastric bypass
Surgical Endoscopy, ISSN: 1432-2218, Vol: 27, Issue: 2, Page: 384-389
2013
- 41Citations
- 46Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations41
- Citation Indexes41
- 41
- CrossRef28
- Captures46
- Readers46
- 46
Review Description
Background: Marginal ulcer formation remains a significant complication of Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RYGB). Up to 1 % of all RYGB patients will develop free perforation of a marginal ulcer. Classically, this complication has required anastomotic revision; however, this approach is associated with significant morbidity. Several small series have suggested that omental patch repair may be effective. The aim of this study was to examine the management of perforated marginal ulcers following RYGB. Methods: All patients who underwent operative intervention for perforated ulcers between 2003 and 2011 were reviewed. Those with a history of RYGB with perforation of a marginal ulcer were included in the analysis. Data collected included operative approach, operative time, blood loss, length of hospital stay, complications, smoking history, and steroid or NSAID use. Results: From January 2003 to December 2011, a total of 1,760 patients underwent RYGB at our institution. Eighteen (0.85 %) developed perforation of a marginal ulcer. Three patients' original procedure was performed at another institution. Eight patients (44 %) had at least one risk factor for ulcer formation. Treatment included omental patch repair (laparoscopic, n = 7; open, n = 9) or anastomotic revision (n = 2). Compared to anastomotic revision, omental patch repair had shorter OR time (101 ± 57 vs. 138 ± 2 min), decreased estimated blood loss (70 ± 72 vs. 250 ± 71 mL), and shorter total length of stay (5.6 ± 1.4 vs. 11.0 ± 5.7 days). Conclusions: Perforated marginal ulcer represents a significant complication of RYGB. Patients should be educated to reduce risk factors for perforation, as prolonged proton pump inhibitor therapy may not prevent this complication in a patient with even just one risk factor. In our sample population we found laparoscopic or open omental patch repair to be a safe and effective treatment for this condition and it was associated with decreased operative time, blood loss, and length of stay. © 2012 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84875868915&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-012-2492-0; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22936436; http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00464-012-2492-0; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00464-012-2492-0; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00464-012-2492-0
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know