Background: Duodenal ulcer perforation is a serious condition. A number of methods have been defined and used in surgical treatment. In this study, it was aimed to compare the effectiveness of 'primary repair' and 'drain placement without repair' methods in duodenal perforations using an animal model.
Methods: Three equivalent groups of ten rats each were formed. Perforation was created in the duodenum in the first (primary repair/sutured group) and the second group (drain placement without repair/sutureless drainage group). In the first group, the per-foration was repaired with sutures. In the second group, only a drain was placed in the abdomen without sutures. In the third group (control group), only laparotomy was performed. Neutrophil count, sedimentation, serum C-reactive protein (CRP), serum total an-tioxidant capacity (TAC), serum total thiol, serum native thiol, and serum myeloperoxidase (MPO) analyses were performed on animal subjects in the pre-operative period and on the post-operative 1st and 7th days. Histological and immunohistochemical (transforming growth factor-beta 1 [TGF-β1]) analyzes were performed. Blood analysis, histological, and immunohistochemical findings obtained from the groups were compared statistically.
Results: There was no significant difference between the first and second groups, except for the TAC on the post-operative 7th day and MPO values on the post-operative 1st day (P>0.05). Although tissue healing was more pronounced in the second group than in the first group, there was no significant difference between the groups (P>0.05). TGF-β1 immunoreactivity observed in the second group was found to be significantly higher than in the first group (P<0.05).
Conclusion: We think that the sutureless drainage method is as effective as the primary repair method in the treatment of duo-denal ulcer perforation and can be safely applied as an alternative to the primary repair method. However, further studies are needed to fully determine the efficacy of the sutureless drainage method.