BACKGROUND: The approach to salvage surgery after failed endoscopic therapy for a bleeding peptic ulcer is controversial. We aimed to compare the outcomes of salvage surgery after failed endoscopic therapy for bleeding peptic ulcers over a 10-year period.METHODS: Patients receiving salvage surgery for bleeding peptic ulcers were divided into 2 cohorts, the 1st from 1993 to 1998 and the 2nd from 1999 to 2004. The type of salvage surgery was defined as minimal if ulcer plication or an ulcerectomy was performed, and definitive if the patient received a vagotomy or gastrectomy.RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-three patients received salvage surgery in the 1st cohort, while 42 patients received surgical hemostasis for the bleeding peptic ulcer in the 2nd cohort. Patients in the 2nd cohort consisted of a larger proportion of in-hospital bleeders (cohort 1: 12.2%, cohort 2: 42.9%; p < 0.005) and had a significantly higher proportion of comorbidities. A larger number of patients received minimal surgery in cohort 2 (cohort 1: 42.3%, cohort 2: 73.8%; p < 0.005).CONCLUSIONS: With advances in therapeutic endoscopy, patients who developed failed endoscopic hemostasis are likely to be poor surgical candidates with multiple comorbidities. The approach to salvage surgery has inclined towards minimal surgery to hasten surgical hemostasis among these fragile patients.
Aged China