COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF PRIMARY REPAIR VERSUS RESECTION AND ANASTOMOSIS IN JEJUNOILEAL PERFORATIONS IN SOUTHERN ODISHA

BACKGROUND Small intestinal perforation remains a major issue in this region of study. Most often, it is caused by either infections due to typhoid, tuberculosis or traumatic due to blunt or penetrating injuries. The mortality reported is related to various factors including age, delayed treatment, sepsis at presentation and inadequate treatment due to lack of resources. Management is therefore complex not only with regards to choose the most suitable surgical treatment, but also as regards an early diagnosis of complications, which is difficult in absence of diagnostic modalities that are often not available. The aim of the study is to compare primary repair versus intestinal resection and anastomosis in case of jejunoileal perforations due to various aetiologies. MATERIALS AND METHODS 60 patients with acute peritonitis underwent emergency laparotomy. Aetiology, number of perforations, size of perforations, site of perforations, surgical procedure undertaken and postoperative complications were recorded. The patients were divided into two groups according to the surgical procedure adapted at laparotomy; primary repair and intestinal resection and anastomosis. Clinical data, intraoperative findings and complications were evaluated and compared. RESULTS 40 out of 60, we found jejunoileal perforations, gastroduodenal in 20 patients. 23 had undergone primary repair and 17 resection and anastomosis. Postoperative complications were compared among both groups in relation to various factors. Conclusion was drawn as to prefer, which surgery in which group of patients. CONCLUSION In our study, detailed analysis of the complication pattern shows primary closure is associated with less number of complications in traumatic cases and resection and anastomosis is associated with lesser complications in infective cases. Primary closure is less complicated for single perforations as compared to multiple perforations. Resection and anastomosis is less complicated for large size perforations. Perforations proximal to ileocaecal valve are better treated by primary closure than resection and anastomosis