Table 1 Characteristics of the included studies
Author (year) | Period | Country | Groups | N° patients | Gender (M/F) | Age | Site of perforation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Lau et al. [20] | 1992–1994 | China | Laparoscopy vs. Open | 24–211 | 20/4–17/41 | 52.3 ± 13.8–51.1 ± 19.71 | Duodenum: 20–161 Juxtapyloric: 3–21 Gastric: 1—3 1 |
24–242 | 22/2–20/4 2 | 47.8 ± 17.5–44.9 ± 18.82 | Duodenum: 19–21 2 Juxtapyloric: 4–2 2 Gastric: 1—1 2 | ||||
Siu et al. [21] | 1994–1997 | China | Laparoscopy vs. Open | 63–58 | 53/10–45/13 | 53.8 ± 18.4–56.1 ± 19.0 | Duodenum: 45–48 Pylorus: 2—4 Prepyloric: 15–6 Stomach: 1–0 |
Bertleff et al. [22] | 1999–2005 | Netherlands | Laparoscopy vs. Open | 52–49 | 29/23–32/17 | 66 ± 25.8–59 ± 29.5 | Pyloric: 8–12 Postpyloric: 20–14 Prepyloric: 19–22 |
Shah et al. [23] | 2009–2011 | India | Laparoscopy vs. Open | 25–25 | 20/5–21/4 | 50.4 ± 18.6–51.2 ± 18.2 | Duodenum: 16–13 Pylorus: 3–2 Prepyloric: 6–10 |
Zedan et al. [24] | 2012–2014 | Egypt | Laparoscopy vs. Open | 21–24 | 14/7–18/6 | 40 ± 9.4–42 ± 13.4 | Duodenum: 21—24 |
Ge et al. [25] | 2010–2014 | China | Laparoscopy vs. Open | 58–61 | 49/9–54/7 | 46.4 ± 20.4–46.5 ± 18 | Duodenal: 39–31 Gastric: 19–30 |
Arroyo Vázquez et al. [26] | 2014–2018 | Sweden | Endoscopy vs. Laparoscopy | 13–15 | 6/7–7/8 | 80 ± 48–75 ± 68 | Duodenum: 13–15 |
Negm et al. [27] | 2019–2021 | Egypt | Endoscopy vs. Surgery (40 laparoscopic and 10 open) | 50–50 | 33/17–36/14 | 47 ± 9–36 ± 27 | Duodenum: 29–35 Gastric: 21–15 |
Total | 1992–2021 | 657 patients Laparoscopy: 322 (49%) Open: 272 (41.4%) Endoscopic: 63 (9.6%) | 496 males (75.5%), 161 females (24.5%) | 46–80 | Duodenum: 439 (66.8%) |