RESUMEN

PURPOSE: The study aimed to evaluate safety of omitting the intraabdominal drains after perforated peptic ulcer repairs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a prospective, randomized, controlled trial from January 2022 to January 2024 at the Emergency surgery department. Patients with perforated peptic ulcers were evaluated for eligibility. They were randomly assigned into two groups. In group A: two intraabdominal drains (pelvic and hepatorenal). in group B: no intraabdominal drains. The primary outcome was hospital length of stay (LOS), and the secondary outcomes included parameters of recovery and 30-day morbidities. The data were analyzed using SPSS 16 ®. RESULTS: Thirty five patients were in the no drain group, while 36 patients were in the drain group. Patients in the no drains group had significantly earlier bowel motion (21.6 vs 28.69 hours; p = 0.004), fluid diet (73.54 vs 86.78 hours; p 0.001), and solid intake (84.4 vs. 98 hours; p 0.001), less pain severity (p = 0.0001) and shorter hospital stay (4.74 vs 5.75 days; p 0.001). A significant less morbidity, including surgical site infection (p = 0.01), and respiratory complications (p 0.0001), were in the no drain group. There was no difference of fever duration nor wound dehiscence. CONCLUSIONS: Omitting the intraabdominal drains is safe after peptic ulcer perforation repair. It can improve outcomes. The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT06084741.

RESUMEN

Due to the advances in endoscopic technology, surgery for duodenal ulcer (DU) bleeding has decreased, although surgery is still necessary for more complicated cases. The concept of damage control surgery (DCS) has been established in the field of trauma, and a simple surgical approach may be preferable in serious cases such as uncontrolled DU bleeding. We present a successful case of bleeding with massive hematoma and perforation of the duodenum due to an over-the-scope clip that was treated by a less invasive surgical approach with consideration of the DCS.

RESUMEN

This case report underscores the importance of utilizing E-VAC (endoscopic vacuum-assisted closure) in the treatment of a perforated duodenal ulcer complicated by the formation of a subphrenic abscess and septic shock. It showcases how E-VAC can effectively mitigate the risk of further complications, such as leakage, bleeding, or rupture, which are more commonly associated with traditional methods like stents, clips, or sutures. As a result, there is a significant reduction in mortality rates. A perforated duodenal ulcer accompanied by abscess formation represents a critical medical condition that demands prompt surgical intervention. The choice of the method for abscess drainage and perforation closure plays a pivotal role in determining the patient's chances of survival. Notably, in patients with a high ASA (American Association of Anesthesiologists) score of IV-V, the mortality rate following conventional surgical intervention is considerably elevated. The management of perforated duodenal ulcers has evolved from open abdominal surgical procedures, which were associated with high mortality rates and risk of suture repair leakage, to minimally invasive techniques like laparoscopy and ingestible robots. Previously, complications arising from peptic ulcers, such as perforations, leaks, and fistulas, were primarily addressed through surgical and conservative treatments. However, over the past two decades, the medical community has shifted towards employing endoscopic closure techniques, including stents, clips, and E-VAC. E-VAC, in particular, has shown promising outcomes by promoting rapid and consistent healing. This case report presents the clinical scenario of a patient diagnosed with septic shock due to a perforated duodenal ulcer with abscess formation. Following an exploratory laparotomy that confirmed the presence of a subphrenic abscess, three drainage tubes were utilized to evacuate it. Subsequently, E-VAC therapy was initiated, with the kit being replaced three times during the recovery period. The patient exhibited favorable progress, including weight gain, and was ultimately discharged as fully recovered. In the treatment of patients with duodenal perforated ulcers and associated abscess formation, the successful and comprehensive drainage of the abscess, coupled with the closure of the perforation, emerges as a pivotal factor influencing the patient's healing process. The positive outcomes observed in these patients underscore the efficacy of employing a negative pressure E-VAC kit, resulting in thorough drainage, rapid patient recovery, and low mortality rates.

RESUMEN

Mild gastrointestinal symptoms and mild abdominal pain often occur in association with COVID-19. However, acute abdomen and severe abdominal pain warranting urgent surgical treatment are rare. Here we present the case of a 40-year-old man who presented with the clinical picture of a perforated duodenal ulcer. He was eventually found to have COVID-19 and was treated conservatively. In this report, we discuss his course of treatment and review the relevant literature.

RESUMEN

Duodenal ulcer perforation, a frequent surgical emergency, needs simple closure with indirect Graham's Omentopexy which is effective with excellent results in majority of cases despite patients' late presentation. The objective of the study was to determine the frequency of postoperative complications of perforated duodenal ulcer, conducted in the Surgery Department, Jinnah Postgraduate Medical Centre, Karachi, from March 20, 2018 to September 20, 2018. The study was a descriptive case series of 108 patients of both genders with perforated duodenal ulcer > 1 week old with ASA score I & II. Patients with trauma and comorbidities were excluded. The patients underwent laparotomy and peritoneal toilet, and after noting the site of perforation indirect Graham's Omentopexy was performed. Complications like duodenal fistula, peritonitis, and paralytic ileus, and patient's death within 10 days of surgery were noted. Age ranged from 18 to 50 years with mean age of 35.027±5.13 years, mean weight 71.120±12.77 kg, mean height 1.541 ±0.09 metres, mean BMI 29.975±4.99 kg/m2, and the mean duration of complaint was 4.194±1.30 weeks. Male predominance in 75 (69.4%) patients. Duodenal fistula was seen in 10 (9.3%) patients, peritonitis 12 (11.1%), paralytic ileus 14 (13%) and mortality was in 11 (10.2%) patients.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Marginal ulcers are a late complication of gastric bypass surgery. A marginal ulcer is a term for ulcers that develop at the margins of a gastrojejunostomy, primarily on the jejunal side. A perforated ulcer involves the entire thickness of an organ, creating an opening on both surfaces. We will present an intriguing case of a 59-year-old Caucasian female who arrived at the emergency department with diffused chest and abdominal pain that began in her left shoulder and went down to the right lower quadrant area. The patient was in visible pain with restlessness, and her abdomen was moderately distended. The computed tomography (CT) showed possible perforation in the gastric bypass surgery area, but the results were inconclusive. The patient had laparoscopic cholecystectomy ten days prior, and the pain began right after surgery. The patient underwent an open abdominal exploratory surgery, with the closure of the perforated marginal ulcer. The fact that the patient had undergone another surgery and had pain immediately afterward also obscured the diagnosis. This case shows the rare presentation of the patientäs diverse signs and symptoms and inconclusive reports that led to the open abdominal exploratory surgery that finally confirmed the diagnosis. This case highlights the importance of a thorough past medical history, including surgical history. The past surgical history led the team to zone in on the gastric bypass area, leading to an accurate differential diagnosis.

RESUMEN

Background Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols are nowadays considered the standard of care for various elective surgical procedures. However, its utilization remains low in tier-two and tier-three cities of India, and there exists a significant variation in the practice. In the present study, we have investigated the safety and feasibility of these protocols or pathways in emergency surgery for perforated duodenal ulcer disease. Methods A total of 41 patients with perforated duodenal ulcers were randomly divided into two groups. All the patients across the study were treated surgically with the open Graham patch repair technique. Patients in group A were managed with ERAS protocols, while patients in group B were managed with conventional peri-operative practices. A comparison was established between the two groups in terms of the duration of hospital stay and other postoperative parameters. Results The study was conducted on 41 patients who presented during the study period. Group A patients (n=19) were managed with standard protocols, and group B patients (n=22) were managed with conventional standard protocols. As compared to the standard care group, patients in the ERAS group showed quicker postoperative recovery and lesser complications. The need for nasogastric (NG) tube reinsertion, postoperative pain, postoperative ileus, and surgical site infections (SSI) were all significantly lower in the patients of the ERAS group. A significant reduction in the length of hospital stay (LOHS) was found in the ERAS group when compared to the standard care group (relative risk {RR}=61.2; p=0.000). Conclusions The application of ERAS protocols with certain modifications in the management of perforated duodenal ulcers yields significant outcomes in terms of reduced duration of hospital stay and fewer postoperative complications in a selected subgroup of patients. However, the application of ERAS pathways in an emergency setup needs to be further evaluated to develop standardized protocols for a surgical emergency group of patients.

RESUMEN

Obesity is a growing health concern worldwide, with bariatric surgeries such as gastric bypass providing an effective treatment choice. However, a rare complication of gastric bypass is a duodenal ulcer. Currently, there is no exact incidence of this complication, and only a few case reports have been published in the literature. Presented is a case of a 32-year-old patient, eight years status post gastric bypass, who was evaluated for surgical repair of a large anterior perforated duodenal ulcer. This case report explores the relationship between patient history and gastric bypass surgery in the case of duodenal ulcer formation and perforation, as well as the diagnostic difficulty and modalities for duodenal ulcers in post-gastric bypass patients.

RESUMEN

Background: Erector spinae plane block (ESPB) a new block described for post-operative analgesia. Since 2016 the block has become a common practice in many institutions globally. Evidence has shown that ESPB is superior to truncal and abdominal wall blocks for many thoracic and abdominal surgeries. Case Presentation: A 29-year-old male, ASA (American Society of Anesthesiologists) IIE patient presented with acute appendicitis. Patient was scheduled to undergo Laparoscopic Appendicectomy under general anesthesia (GA) with ESPB for post op analgesia. In the operating room after induction of GA patient received an ultrasound (US) guided bilateral ESPB at T10 level of the spinal cord with 20 mls of 0.25% levobupivacaine on each side. Intraoperatively the appendix was found to be normal and there was an incidental finding of perforated superior/first part of duodenum (D1). The duodenum was repaired. Patient remained hemodynamically stable intraoperatively. No intraoperative morphine was required. After uneventful extubation, the patient was transferred to post-operative anesthesia care unit (PACU). Patient reported pain score of zero on a 11-point numerical rating scale (NRS) in PACU. No morphine was required in the next 24 hours on the ward either. Conclusion: ESPB can provide opioid free analgesia for laparoscopic repair of perforated duodenal ulcer both intra and postoperatively.

RESUMEN

Splenic abscesses are rare, with a reported prevalence of 0.14-0.7% in autopsy studies. The treatment options for splenic abscesses include intravenous antimicrobial therapy, percutaneous drainage, and splenectomy. Although the dissemination of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) intervention techniques has made it possible to perform puncture and drainage via the transgastrointestinal route for intra-abdominal abscesses where the percutaneous route has been difficult, there have been few reports of EUS-guided drainage of splenic abscesses. A case of a splenic abscess associated with a perforated duodenal ulcer that was successfully treated with EUS-guided transgastric drainage is described. An 89-year-old Asian woman with a perforated duodenal ulcer underwent surgery at another hospital. After surgery, the patient developed a splenic abscess, for which percutaneous treatment was anatomically difficult. Therefore, she was referred to our hospital for treatment of the splenic abscess using EUS-guided drainage. EUS-guided transgastric drainage was performed under sedation using a convex EUS scope. The splenic abscess, measuring approximately 4 × 3 cm2, was punctured using a 19-gauge aspiration needle. A 6-Fr pigtail nasocystic drainage tube was placed in the abscess cavity. The procedure was completed without any complications. After EUS-guided drainage, the abscess cavity decreased in size over time, and the patient had a good clinical course and was subsequently discharged. EUS-guided drainage of splenic abscesses may be a safe and effective therapeutic alternative to percutaneous drainage and surgery; however, large-scale investigations are required to confirm the present findings.

RESUMEN

Duodenocaval fistula (DCF) is a rare entity which is sparsely described in the literature. Few etiologies have been listed including chemoradiation therapy. Early recognition may reduce the high mortality rate. We describe the case of a 63-year-old woman with a history of stage III ovarian cancer treated with cytoreductive surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy, including bevacizumab, who presented to the hospital because of fresh blood per rectum. One month earlier, the patient was admitted to the intensive care unit because of hemorrhagic shock secondary to a necrotic duodenal ulcer and was treated with cauterization. The patient was stable when discharged home, however, she was readmitted to the hospital because of hematemesis and hematochezia and was again in hemorrhagic shock for which the patient was urgently transfused. An abdominal computerized tomography (CT) angiography demonstrated locules of air within the intrahepatic and infrahepatic inferior vena cava (IVC), as well as evidence of communication with the duodenal lumen, and a thrombus within the IVC. The patient was evaluated by the surgical oncology and vascular teams, who deemed the patient inoperable. Our case describes ovarian malignancy, treated by radiation, leading to duodenitis, with subsequent ulcer formation. The co-administration of bevacizumab delayed gastric healing and promoted ulcer perforation favoring fistula formation.

RESUMEN

Hospital-acquired infections are nosocomially acquired infections that are not present or incubating at the time of admission to a hospital. During the COVID-19 pandemic, many hospitals became sources of the infection, creating a great challenge for health care providers and uninfected patients who visited these hospitals seeking medical or surgical advice. We are presenting a middle-aged man who complained of abdominal pain associated with poor oral intake during the COVID-19 pandemic in January 2021. After being diagnosed with a perforated duodenal ulcer, he underwent laparoscopic repair. He was postoperatively referred to interventional radiology for central line insertion. However, as one of the pre-procedure perquisites during the COVID-19 pandemic, he underwent a nasopharyngeal swab real-time PCR test, which was positive for COVID-19 infection to be considered hospital-acquired. This article shows how the pandemic may complicate the post-surgical condition, increasing patient morbidity and mortality.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Peptic ulcer perforation is a common surgical emergency and a major cause of death especially in elderly patients, despite the fact of the presence of effective drug treatments and an increased understanding of its etiology. Giant duodenal perforations, in particular, pose a significant challenge and there is scarce data regarding their optimal management. Laparoscopic surgery is advocated in the surgical treatment of perforated duodenal ulcer disease, in experienced hands. METHODS: Herein we present an 84-year-old man with past medical history of type II diabetes mellitus and hypertension who was admitted to our Department due to epigastric pain and diffuse peritonitis. CT scan revealed the presence of a significant amount of free air and fluid in the upper abdomen secondary to a duodenal perforation. RESULTS: The patient was taken immediately to the theater for an urgent laparoscopy. Methylene blue via the NG tube better defined the extent of the duodenal perforation which was not amenable to a primary repair. Consequently, a decision was made for a laparoscopic pancreas-sparing, ampulla preserving gastroduodenectomy with intracorporeal Billroth II gastrojejunal anastomosis. The postoperative period was uneventful and the patient was discharged on the 13th postoperative day. Histopathology revealed a large benign duodenal ulcer. CONCLUSIONS: Although the incidence of peptic ulcer disease is decreasing, it appears that the incidence of complications is rising. Laparoscopic approach, especially when performed by laparoscopic surgery experts, could be a treatment option for difficult duodenal ulcer perforations with less pain, shorter hospital stay and reduced morbidity.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Background Perforated peptic ulcer disease (PUD) is one of the most common causes of acute peritonitis. It carries significant mortality and morbidity. Several previous studies have reported a seasonal variation in the presentation of patients with perforated ulcers. Here we present this study from our experience in a Northern Irish acute district hospital. Methods A retrospective cohort study was conducted on perforated peptic ulcer patients who presented to Altnagelvin Area Hospital emergency department between 2015 to 2020. Data on patient demographics, clinical presentation, investigations, management and outcomes were collected. Primary outcome was to investigate if seasonality was associated with the incidence of perforated peptic ulcers. Follow-up data were also collected. Seasons were defined as per UK Met Office. Results A total of 50 patients presented with perforated PUD. Male to female ratio was approximately 3:2. Peaks were noted in spring and winter. April was the most common month for presentation followed by December. Smoking was the most common risk factor followed by alcohol abuse. Fourteen patients (28%) were either very frail or had contained perforations and were conservatively managed. Three deaths were noted (6%). Thirteen patients (26%) required ICU admission at some stage in their management. Conclusion Slight seasonal variation was noted in the presentation of perforated peptic ulcers in our study with a higher incidence in the winter and spring months. The month of April was noted to have the peak incidence of the disease in our study.

RESUMEN

Introduction Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols have been widely studied in elective abdominal surgeries with promising outcomes. However, the use of these protocols in emergency abdominal surgeries has not been widely investigated. This study aimed to evaluate ERAS application outcomes via early oral feeding compared to regular postoperative care in patients undergoing perforated duodenal ulcer repairs in emergency abdominal surgeries. Materials and methods We conducted a randomized controlled trial at the Surgical Unit 1 Benazir Bhutto Hospital from August 2018 to December 2019. A total of 42 patients presenting to the emergency department with peritonitis secondary to suspected perforated duodenal ulcer were included in the study. Patients were randomly assigned into two groups. Group A patients followed an ERAS protocol for early oral feeding, and Group B received regular postoperative care (i.e., delayed oral feeding). Our primary outcomes were the length of hospital stay, duodenal repair site leak, the severity of pain (via the visual analog scale), and postoperative ileus duration. Results were analyzed via IBM Statistical Product and Service Solutions (SPSS) Statistics for Windows, Version 20.0 (Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.). and chi-square and independent t-tests were applied. Results Patients who received early oral feeding (Group A) showed a shorter length of hospital stay, lower pain scores, and shorter postoperative ileus duration than patients in the traditional postoperative care group. Also, we noted no duodenal repair site leak in the early oral feeding group. The differences between the two groups were statistically significant (P<0.05). Conclusions Based on our results, ERAS protocols that promote early oral feeding can be applied in patients undergoing emergency abdominal surgery for perforated duodenal repair. Early oral feeding in emergency surgery patients can reduce the patient burden on hospitals. In addition, early oral feeding can promote better outcomes and reduced economic burden for patients. Keywords: Perforated duodenal ulcer, ERAS protocol, randomized controlled trial, duodenal repair site leak, length of hospital stay, VAS score, postoperative ileus.

RESUMEN

Peptic ulcer is a defect in the mucosal layer of the stomach or duodenum that extends into the deeper layers of their walls. Patients with peptic ulcer disease (PUD) may be asymptomatic or have mild abdominal discomfort. It is one of the common etiologies of perforated viscus resulting in secondary peritonitis, a life-threatening condition that carries high risk for morbidity and mortality especially in those who present late to the hospital or due to unrecognized and misdiagnosed perforation. Early detection of perforation of peptic ulcers should be based on clinical data and imaging techniques. We report a case of a 56-year-old female who presented to our ED with right upper quadrant (RUQ) pain radiating to the right shoulder, alleviated by food, and not aggravated by anything. On examination, the patient was vitally stable, tenderness in the RUQ was appreciated, and Murphy sign was positive. Thus, she was diagnosed with perforation of anterior first part of the duodenum. What makes our case peculiar is the presentation of biliary colic in the setting of perforated peptic ulcer.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Perforated peptic ulcer is a life-threatening condition. Traditional treatment is surgery. Esophageal perforations and anastomotic leakages can be treated with endoscopically placed covered stents and drainage. We have treated selected patients with a perforated duodenal ulcer with a partially covered stent. The aim of this study was to compare surgery with stent treatment for perforated duodenal ulcers in a multicenter randomized controlled trial. METHODS: All patients presenting at the ER with abdominal pain, clinical signs of an upper G-I perforation, and free air on CT were approached for inclusion and randomized between surgical closure and stent treatment. Age, ASA score, operation time, complications, and hospital stay were recorded. Laparoscopy was performed in all patients to establish diagnosis. Surgical closure was performed using open or laparoscopic techniques. For stent treatment, a per-operative gastroscopy was performed and a partially covered stent was placed through the scope. Abdominal lavage was performed in all patients, and a drain was placed. All patients received antibiotics and intravenous PPI. Stents were endoscopically removed after 2-3 weeks. Complications were recorded and classified according to Clavien-Dindo (C-D). RESULTS: 43 patients were included, 28 had a verified perforated duodenal ulcer, 15 were randomized to surgery, and 13 to stent. Median age was 77.5 years (23-91) with no difference between groups. ASA score was unevenly distributed between the groups (p = 0.069). Operation time was significantly shorter in the stent group, 68 min (48-107) versus 92 min (68-154) (p = 0.001). Stents were removed after a median of 21 days (11-37 days) without complications. Six patients in the surgical group had a complication and seven patients in the stent group (C-D 2-5) (n.s.). CONCLUSIONS: Stent treatment together with laparoscopic lavage and drainage offers a safe alternative to traditional surgical closure in perforated duodenal ulcer. A larger sample size would be necessary to show non-inferiority regarding stent treatment.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To study the outcomes of fast-track recovery in patients with perforated duodenal ulcer (PDU). MATERIAL AND METHODS: There were 138 patients with PDU who underwent surgical treatment for the period from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2019. Patients were divided into 3 groups: main group, control group 1 (CG-1) and control group 2 (CG-2). The main group (fast-track group, FT-group) included 51 patients who underwent laparoscopic suturing of PDU followed by enhanced recovery (fast-track). CG-1 comprised 44 patients who underwent open suturing of PDU and conventional perioperative treatment. CG-2 consisted of 43 patients who underwent laparoscopic suturing and conventional perioperative treatment. Complications were assessed using Clavien-Dindo grading system. RESULTS: In the FT group, postoperative complications were observed in 2 patients (3.92%). Anemia of mixed genesis (Clavien-Dindo grade II) was diagnosed in 1 patient and left-sided lower lobe pneumonia in another one (grade II). There were no deaths. Mean length of hospital-stay was 3.86 days. In the 1st control group, the largest number of complications was observed (n=12, 27.27%) including 9 extra-abdominal complications (pulmonary disorders (II) - 7 patients (15.9%); sepsis (IVB) - 1 (2.27%), delirium (IVA) - 1 patient (2.27%), postoperative wound seroma (IIIA) - 1 (2.27%) patient). Intra-abdominal complications consisted of compensated pyloroduodenal stenosis (II) in 1 (2.27%) case, recurrent bleeding from acute gastric and duodenal ulcers (IIIB) in 1 (2.27%) patient. Mortality rate was 4.54% (n=2) in this group (progressive multiple organ failure). Mean length of hospital-stay was 7.56 days. In the 2nd control group, postoperative complications included extra-abdominal (pulmonary disorders (II) - pneumonia in 4 (9.3%) cases, spontaneous pneumothorax (IIIA) in 1 (2.32%) case) and intra-abdominal events (duodenitis (II) in 1 (2.32%) patient and compensated pyloroduodenal stenosis (II) in another 1 (2.32%) patient). There were no lethal outcomes in this group. Mean length of hospital-stay was 6.7 days. CONCLUSION: Treatment outcomes in patients with perforated duodenal ulcer confirmed an effectiveness of laparoscopic suturing and complete abdominal sanitation. These measures create the prerequisites for fast track recovery in urgent surgical practice. FT-protocol of inpatient management is followed by reduced hospital-stay and less incidence of postoperative complications. Moreover, this approach promotes early and safe discharge of patients.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Background Laparoscopic surgery is becoming the gold standard for most abdominal surgeries in recent times. Laparoscopic repair of perforated duodenal ulcer (PDU), however, is still an area of debate. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of laparoscopic repair of PDU versus open repair. Methods In this cross-sectional study, patients were consecutively sampled. Out of 101 patients with clinically diagnosed PDU, 36 patients underwent laparoscopic Graham patch repair and 65 underwent open Graham patch repair in a tertiary care academic hospital. Open repair was via upper midline incision, and laparoscopic repair by the three-port technique. The following stages were calculated: operative time, duration of postoperative analgesia, time taken to mobilize, and patient length of stay after the operation. Results The mean operative time was somewhat longer in the laparoscopy group compared to the open repair group (74.01 vs 56.17 minutes, respectively). Mean postoperative analgesia requirement, time taken to mobilize, and hospital stay were significantly shorter after laparoscopy than after open repair (1.21 days, 9.32 hours, and 3.12 days vs 3.83 days, 16.20 hours, and 4.85 days, respectively). Three patients (8%) in the laparoscopy group and 35 (54%) in the open repair group had postoperative complications. Conclusions Laparoscopic repair of PDU is a safe approach and better than open repair in terms of operative time with the right level of expertise only, postoperative analgesia requirement, mobilization, duration of hospital stay, and incidence of postoperative respiratory and wound complications.

RESUMEN

Giant duodenal ulcers (GDUs) are full-thickness disruptions of the gastrointestinal epithelium greater than 3cm in diameter. The significant size and disease chronicity lead to deleterious outcomes and high mortality risk if ulcer progression is not halted. While still prevalent in developing countries, GDUs are increasingly rare in industrialized nations. Here, we present the case of an 82-year-old woman with perforated GDU requiring emergent surgical intervention complicated by prior duodenal surgery requiring a previously unreported triple-layered omental patch. Discussion of this technique and novel approaches to GDU repair ensue.