Is there a role of abdominal drainage in primarily repaired perforated peptic ulcers?

Objective: To compare the survival and post-op complications following primary closure of perforated peptic ulcer by omental patch technique in 4 groups of patients as follows: two-drain group, one-drain subhepatic group, one-drain pelvic group and nodrain group. Methods: This is a prospective case-controlled clinical study performed in the Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College Hospital, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, India. A total of 114 patients with perforated peptic ulcer who underwent emergency laparotomy with primary closure by omental patch technique were studied in 4 groups as mentioned above. Tube drains were used throughout the study. Results: Mean age of patients was 45±12.7 years (range 1575) with M:F ratio of 5:1. Clinical profile of patients matched in the 4 groups. Post-operative fever, vomiting, laparotomy wound infection, wound dehiscence and intraperitoneal collection were significantly lower in the no-drain group as compared to drain groups. There was found no significant difference between the no-drain and drain groups with respect to the postoperative abdominal distension, pain, intraabdominal sepsis, gastro-intestinal leak, adult respiratory distress syndrome and mortality. Drain-related complications were recorded in 36.8% of patients with tube drain(s). Conclusion: Peptic perforation closure with omental patch technique is safe without prophylactic drainage and a high rate of drain-related morbidity negates the concept of the routine drainage after this procedure. One drain placement is as good as the two drain placement and sub-hepatic drain is more useful than the pelvic drain.