CLINICAL CHARACTERISTICS AND OUTCOMES OF LAPAROSCOPIC MANAGEMENT OF PERITONITIS SECONDARY TO GASTROINTESTINAL PERFORATION

Thanh Phuc Nguyen1, Hong Quan Dang2, , Van Nong Lai2
1 An Giang General Hospital
2 Can Tho University of Medicine and Pharmacy

Main Article Content

Abstract

Background: Secondary peritonitis caused by gastrointestinal perforation is a severe surgical emergency with rapid progression and high mortality if not promptly treated. Laparoscopic surgery, with its advantages of minimal invasiveness, has increasingly been adopted for the management of this condition. Objectives: To describe the clinical characteristics and etiologies of peritonitis secondary to gastrointestinal perforation, and to evaluate the outcomes of emergency laparoscopic management. Materials and methods:  A non-controlled interventional clinical study was conducted on 122 patients diagnosed with peritonitis secondary to gastrointestinal perforation who underwent laparoscopic surgery at Can Tho Central General Hospital and An Giang General Hospital between May 2025 and December 2025. Results: The median age was 61.5 years (range: 17-91), with a male - to - female ratio of 3.88:1. The median Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) was 2 (range: 0-9). Surgery was performed more than 12 hours after symptom onset in 56.6% of patients. Free intraperitoneal air was detected in 57.4% of cases on upright plain abdominal radiography and in 88.1% on computed tomography. Leukocytosis was observed in 73.0% of patients. The most common perforation sites were the stomach and duodenum. The median perforation size was 10 mm (range: 0-30). Generalized peritonitis accounted for 89.3% of cases, and the median Mannheim Peritonitis Index (MPI) was 21 (range: 0-37). The median operative time was 80 minutes (range: 40-200). Primary closure of the perforation was performed in 93.4% of patients, with a conversion rate to open surgery of 9.0%. The median postoperative hospital stay was 7 days (range: 3-20). No postoperative complications were recorded in 82.0% of patients. Good and fair outcomes after 30 days of treatment were achieved in 79.5% and 13.9% of patients, respectively. Conclusions: Laparoscopic surgery is a feasible approach associated with favorable short-term outcomes in appropriately selected patients with peritonitis secondary to gastrointestinal perforation, when appropriately indicated and performed by an experienced surgical team. 

Article Details

Author Biographies

Thanh Phuc Nguyen, An Giang General Hospital

Bác sĩ Ngoại khoa

Cấp bậc: BSCKI

Hong Quan Dang, Can Tho University of Medicine and Pharmacy

Bác sĩ Ngoại khoa

Cấp bậc: Tiến sĩ bác sĩ

Van Nong Lai, Can Tho University of Medicine and Pharmacy

Bác sĩ Ngoại khoa

Cấp bậc: BSCKII

References

1. Hameed T., Kumar A., Sahni S., Bhatia R., and Vidhyarthy A.K. Emerging spectrum of perforation peritonitis in developing world. Frontiers in Surgery. 2020. 7, 50, doi: https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2020.00050.
2. Hoshino N., Endo H., Hida K., Kumamaru H., Hasegawa H., et al. Laparoscopic surgery for acute diffuse peritonitis due to gastrointestinal perforation: a nationwide epidemiologic study using the National Clinical Database. Annals of gastroenterological surgery. 2022. 6(3), 430444, doi: https://doi.org/10.1002/ags3.12533.
3. Miranda D.J.C., Barahona A.C.P., Vásconez P.A.A., Cedeño D.S.R., Silva A.D., et al. Advances in laparoscopic surgery for the treatment of secondary peritonitis due to gastrointestinal perforation: a systematic review of mortality, complications, and recovery time. Ibero-American Journal of Health Science Research. 2025. 5(1), 57-63, doi: https://doi.org/10.56183/iberojhr.v5i1.712.
4. Trần Văn Hoan, Nguyễn Văn Chung, Trần Đức Quý. Kết quả phẫu thuật nội soi khâu lỗ thủng ổ loét dạ dày - hành tá tràng tại Bệnh viện Trung ương Thái Nguyên. Tạp chí Y học Việt Nam. 2024. 535(1), 42-46, doi: https://doi.org/10.51298/vmj.v535i1.8342.
5. Trần Nguyễn Bảo Tuấn, Đỗ Trường Sơn, Nguyễn Hữu Sâm, Trịnh Tuấn Dương, Đặng Quốc Ái. Đánh giá kết quả phẫu thuật nội soi khâu ổ loét tá tràng thủng tại Bệnh viện E. Tạp chí Y học Việt Nam. 2024. 542(2), 375-380, doi: https://doi.org/10.51298/vmj.v542i2.11145.
6. Nguyễn Văn Mạnh, Đoàn Thanh Huy, Nguyễn Mạnh Khoẻ. Đặc điểm lâm sàng và kết quả điều trị phẫu thuật thủng đường tiêu hóa do dị vật tại Bệnh viện Quân Y 175. Tạp chí Y Dược Thực hành 175. 2024. (39), 25-38, doi: https://doi.org/10.59354/ydth175.2024.282.
7. Shahid M.H., Khan F.I., Askri Z., Asad A., Alam M.A., et al. One Year of Experience Managing Peritonitis Secondary to Gastrointestinal Perforation at a Tertiary Care Hospital: A Retrospective Analysis. Cureus. 2022. 14(4), e23966, doi:https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.23966.
8. Pouli S., Kozana A., Papakitsou I., Daskalogiannaki M., Raissaki M. Gastrointestinal perforation: clinical and MDCT clues for identification of aetiology. Insights into imaging. 2020. 11(31), doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13244-019-0823-6.
9. Mohapatra A., Mohapatra A., Bairisal P.P. Peritonitis Due to Hollow Viscus Perforation, A Clinical Retrospective Study in A Tertiary Health Care. Journal of Neonatal Surgery. 2025. 14(32s), 2988-2992.
10. Gupta P.K., Mandloi D., Sharma A., Khare V., Pendro T. A clinical evaluation, assesment and management of peritonitis secondary to hollow viscus perforation. Int J Acad Med Pharm. 2024. 6(1), 1159-1166, doi: https://doi.org/10.47009/jamp.2024.6.1.230.