Omentopexy versus falciformopexy for peptic ulcer perforation

BACKGROUND: Open or laparoscopic Graham's omentopexy is frequently used in the treatment of peptic ulcer perforation (PUP). The technical difficulty of applying the omental plug, especially in patients with previous omentum resection, has led to the use of falciform ligament for the PUP, and some studies have reported that PUP may even be a more advantageous technique than omentopexy. Here, in this study, we aimed to compare the retrospective results of patients who underwent falciformopexy or omentopexy for PUP. METHODS: Between 1999 and 2018, 303 patients who were followed-up and treated for PUP were included in this study. Patients who had malignancy, gastric resection, definitive ulcer surgery, laparoscopic surgery and nonoperative treatment were excluded from this study. In the remaining patients, either open ometopexy or falciformopexy were applied based on the surgeon's choice. These two techniques were compared for intraoperative and postoperative outcomes. RESULTS: Falciformopexy (n=46) and omentopexy (n=243) groups had similar demographics, but ASA scores were lower in the falciformopexy group. For ulcer size and localization, duration of operation, no difference was found between the groups. There was no significant difference between the groups concerning general postoperative morbidity and mortality. However, atelectasis was more frequently observed in the omentopexy group, whereas the pexia failure was more frequent in the falciformopexy group (2.6% and 8.7%, p=0.04). CONCLUSION: Falciformopexy is an alternative technique that can be used in situations where it is not possible to use the omentum. Falciformopexy is not superior to omentopexy for the repair of the PUP.