Septic complications of perforated peptic ulcer: clinical experience in Loei hospital.

Authors

  • ปราโมทย์ โคตรพันธุ์กูล Loei hospital

Keywords:

PU perforated, Loei hospital, ascites fluid culture, hemoculture

Abstract

Objectives: A retrospective descriptive study aimed to identify pathogens from hemoculture and ascites fluid culture to prove that peptic ulcer perforation with septic complications are systemic infection or systemic inflammatory response syndrome.

Methods: All 107 patients undergoing emergency surgery of perforated peptic ulcer (PPU) between 1st May 2007 – 30th June 2009 in Loei hospital were recruited. All patients were undergone simple suture with or without omental graft. Demographic characteristics, clinical presentations, investigations, pathogens, hemoculture, ascites fluid culture and surgical outcomes include complication were analyzed.

Results: The study included 107 patients with age from 25-86 years old average 58.76 (S.D.14.1) mostly were male 89.7%, type V was the most common type of ulcer 75.7%. Overall morbidity rate was 14.9% and the mortality rate was 4.7%. Hemoculture was positive in 11.7%. Most common pathogen from hemoculture was Staphylococcus coagulase negative 7.8%. Ascites fluid culture was positive in 23.4%. with pathogens were Gram negative bacteria, Yeast and Gram positive bacteria 15.9%, 12.1% and 9.3% respectively. Morbidity and mortality depend on ascites fluid culture especially fungal infection.

Conclusions: Incidence of positive hemoculture in septic complication of perforated peptic ulcer is quite low (11.7%). The most common pathogens were Gram negative bacteria, Yeast and Gram positive bacteria respectively. If yeast was found from ascites fluid culture, patient may need intensive care due to high morbidities and mortality. Antifungal therapy may need in some patients, however more information should be study.

References

1. Dempsey DT. Stomach. In: Brunicardi FC, Anderson DK, Billar TR, Dunn DL, Hunter JG, Pollock RE, eds. Schwartz’s principle of surgery. 8th ed, New York: The McGrawHill Companies, Inc; 2005. 963-4
2. ธนิต รัตนธรรมสกุล, ชาโล สาณศิลปิน, ชนาพัฒน์ศรีนครินทร์, เอนก มุ่งอ้อมกลาง, ปณิธี ธัมมวิจยะ, จักรรัฐ พิทยาวงศ์อานนท์. การสอบสวนการระบาดของภาวะแผลเปื่อยทางเดินอาหารทะลุในอำเภอบัวใหญ่ บัวลาย และสีดา จังหวัดนครราชสีมา พ.ศ. 2558. รายงานการเฝ้าระวังทางระบาดวิทยาประจำสัปดาห์ 2560; 48: 65-73. [Internet]; Access 5 August 2017. Available from http://www.wesr.moph.go.th/wesr_new/fle/y60/H6052017012920170204.pdf
3. Arici C, Mesci A, Dincer D, Dinckan A, Colak T. Analysis of risk factors predicting (affecting) mortality and morbidity of peptic ulcer perforations. Int Surg. 2007 May-Jun;92(3): 147-54.
4. J.Boey , J. WONG, A Prospective Study of Operative Risk Factors in Perforated Duodenal Ulcers Ann. Surg. March 1982, 265-269.
5. Suriya C, Kasatpibal N, Kunaviktikul W, and Kayee T. Prognostic Factors and Complications in Patients With Operational Peptic Ulcer Perforation in Northern Thailand. Gastroenterology Res. 2014 Feb; 7(1): 5–11.
6. Carlos Noguiera, António Surgio Silva, Jorge Nunes Santos et al. Perforated Peptic Ulcer: Main Factors of Morbidity and Mortality July 2003, Volume 27, Issue 7, 782-787.
7. Reimar W Thomsen MD, PhD, Anders Riis MSc, Estrid M Munk MD, Mette Nørgaard MD, PhD, 30-Day Mortality After Peptic Ulcer Perforation Among Users of Newer Selective Cox-2 Inhibitors and Traditional NSAIDs: A Population-Based Study The American Journal of Gastroenterology (2006) 101, 2704-2710
8. DK Rohit, RS Verma, G Pandey. Clinical study and management of peritonitis secondary to perforated peptic ulcer. International Surgery Journal. August 2017;4(8):2721- 2726
9. RCG Russell, JN. Primrose. Stomach and duodenum. In: Norman S Williums, Christopher JK Bulstrode. Editor. Bailey and Love’s Short practice of surgery. 24th ed. London: Armold; 2004. 1045-6.
10. J. Boey, J. Wong, GB. Ong. Bacteria and septic complications in patients with perforated duodenal ulcers The American Journal of Surgery Volume 143, Issue 5, May 1982. 635-639.
11. Prakash A, Sharma D, Saxena A, Somashekar U, Khare N, Mishra A, Anvikar A. Effect of Candida infection on outcome in patients with perforation peritonitis. Indian J Gastroenterol. 2008 May-Jun;27(3):107-9.
12. SC Lee, CP Fung, HY Chen, et.al. Candida peritonitis due to peptic ulcer perforation: incidence rate, risk factors, prognosis and susceptibility to fluconazole and amphotericin B. Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease. Vol.44, Issue1,September 2002, 23-27.
13. Y.-S. Shan, H.-P. Hsu, Y.-H. Hsieh, et al. Signifcance of intraoperative peritoneal culture of fungus in perforated peptic ulcer. British Journal of Surgery. Volume 90, Issue 10.October 2003. 1215-1219

Downloads

Published

2018-12-05

How to Cite

1.
โคตรพันธุ์กูล ป. Septic complications of perforated peptic ulcer: clinical experience in Loei hospital. udhhosmj [internet]. 2018 Dec. 5 [cited 2026 Mar. 21];26(1):74-82. available from: https://he02.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/udhhosmj/article/view/159107

Issue

Section

Research Article