Study of Incidence of Peptic Ulcer Perforation in Young Adults: A Hospital Based Study
Background: Peptic ulcer formation affects about 2-10% of world population every year with higher incidence in younger individuals. Being a surgical emergency, it has higher mortality and morbidity. Thus, the aim of our study was to evaluate the incidence of peptic ulcer perforation based on gender, age and also to study its associated risk factors, clinical presentations, site along with surgical management and complications.
Materials & Methods: 75 patients diagnosed with perforated peptic ulcer were included and this study was conducted in the department of Surgery Government Bangur Hospital, Pali, Rajasthan, India. Structured performa was prepared to obtained details of patients and ethical clearance from the institute was also taken prior to the study.
Results: 76% of patients in our study were males and 24% were females with male and female ratio 1:3.16. The prevalence of perforation was high in age group 20-30 years (30.7%). 62.7% of cases had positive family history and the incidence was in the patients who consumed non-vegetarian (84.8%), spicy (61.4%) and oily (69.5%) foods. Frequently observed clinical presentation were abdominal pain followed by tenderness and rigidity and gas under diaphragm. The common site of perforation was duodenum (62.7%) and most of the cases were treated by closure with omental patch (81.3%). The post-surgical complications frequently observed were wound infection (30.6%) and chest infection (28%).
Conclusion: Peptic ulcer perforation is common disorder of gastrointestinal tract, now affecting younger adults with male preponderance. It is associated with unwanted health and economic issues. Therefore, earlier management is only the way to minimize complications and mortality.
2. Murray Longmore, Ian B. Wilkinson, Edward H. Davidson, Alexander Foulkes, Ahmad R. Mafi, Oxford Handbook Of Clinical Medicine, 8th edn., New York: Oxford University Press Inc.; 2010
3. Makela JT, Klviniemi H, Ohtonen P, Laitinen SO. Factors that predict morbidity and mortality in patients with perforated peptic ulcers. Eur J Surg., 2002; 168(8-9): 446-51.
4. Zelickson MS, Bronder CM, Johnson BL, Camunas JA, Smith DE, Rawlinson D et al. Helicobacter pylori is not the predominant etiology for peptic ulcers requiring operation. Am Surg., 2011; 77(8): 1054-60.
5. Lau JY, Sung J, Hill C, Henderson C, Howden CW, Metz DC. Systematic review of the epidemiology of complicated peptic ulcer disease: incidence, recurrence, risk factors and mortality. Digestion, 2011; 84(2): 102-13.
6. Svanes C, Lie RT, Kvale G, Svanes K, Soreide O. Incidence of perforated ulcer in western Norway 1935–1990: Cohort or period dependent time trends? Am J Epidemio., 1995;141(9):836-44.
7. AI Ugochukwu, OC Amub, MA Nzegwu, UC Dilibe. Acute perforated peptic ulcer: On clinical experience in an urban tertiary hospital in south east Nigeria. International Journal of Surgery, 2013; 11 (3): 223-7.
8. Everett JS, Harkins HN, Olson HH, Moore HG(Jr), Merendino KA. Perforated Peptic Ulcer: A Study of 136 Cases in a County Hospital. Ann Surg. 1953 Nov; 138(5): 689–697.
9. Kenneth T, Glomsaker TB, von Meer A, Søreide K and Søreide JA. Trends in diagnosis and surgical management of patients with perforated peptic ulcer. J Gastrointest Surg 2011;15(8):1329–35.
10. Bharti RC, Marwaha DC. Immediate definitive surgery in perforated duodenal ulcer: A comparative study, between surgery and simple closure. Indian J Surg., 1996; 275-9.
11. Hannan A, Islam B, Hussain M, Haque MM, Kudrat- E-Khuda MI. Early complications of suture closure of perforated duodenal ulcer: A study of 100 cases. Teach Assoc J. 2005;18(2):122-6.
12. Bansod A, Bansod SA, Galande AB. Study of incidence of peptic ulcer perforation in young adults. Int Surg J 2014;1(3):144–7.
13. Chalya PL, Mabula JB, Koy M, Mchembe MD, Jaka HM, Kabangila R et al. Clinical profile and outcome of surgical treat¬ment of perforated peptic ulcers in Northwestern Tanzania: A tertiary hospital experience. World J Emerg Surg., 2011; 6:31.
14. Khuroo MS, Mahajan R, Zargar SA, et al. Prevalence of peptic ulcer in India: an endoscopic and epidemiological study in urban Kashmir. Gut 1989;30(7):930-934.
15. Svanes C. Trends in perforated peptic ulcer: Incidence, etiology, treatment, and prognosis. World J Surg 2000;24(3):277–83.
16. Evans JMM, McMahon AD, McGilchrist MM, White G, Murray FE, McDevitt DG, et al. Topical non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and admission to hospital for upper gastrointestinal bleeding and perforation: A record linkage case–control study. BMJ. 1995 Jul 1; 311(6996):22–6.
17. Malhotra SL. Peptic ulcer in India and its aetiology. Gut 1964;5(5):412-6.
18. Mehboob M, Khan JA, Rehman S, Saleem SM, Abdul Qayyum A. Peptic duodenal perforation-an audit. JCPSP, 2000;10:101-3.
19. Di Saverio S, Bassi M, Smerieri N, Masetti M, Ferrara F, Fabbri C et al. Diagnosis and treatment of perforated or bleeding peptic ulcers: 2013 WSES position paper. World Journal of Emergency Surgery, 2014; 9:45.
20. Buck DL, Vester-Andersen M, Moller MH. Danish clinical register of emergency surgery surgical delay is a critical determinant of survival in perforated peptic ulcer. Br J Surg 2013;100(8):1045–9
21. Bae S, Shim KN, Kim N, Kang JM, Kim DS, Kim KM, et al. Incidence and short-term mortality from perforated peptic ulcer in Korea: A population-based study. J Epidemiol 2012;22(6):508–16.