Study of the Comparison of Endoscopic Closure and Laparoscopic Repair of Defect of Gastric Wall

Abstract Objective: To make analysis on the curative effect on the technique of endoscopic closure and laparoscopic closure, and explore the effect and safety of acute perforation of the endoscopic closure technique. Methods: Analysis on the 40 therapeutic cases of laparoscopic repair and endoscopic closure treatments, respectively, to submucosal tumours (SMT) of the stomach removed through ESE/EFR. According to the double-sample t-test, the differences of operation time and medical expenses between the two closure methods were compared and analyzed. And used the chi-square test to compare the difference in terms of operational difficulty and effects. Results: Postoperative pathology of 76 therapeutic cases operated through ESE and EFR was diagnosed as mesenchymal tumor and 4 cases as leiomyoma, among which 34 cases were in fundus ventriculi, 30 in corpus ventriculi and 16 in antrum. Endoscopic closure is significantly lower than laparoscopic closure in operation time span (endoscopic closure VS laparoscopic repair 74.70±23.55min vs 178.35±38.98min, p < 0.001) , medical expenses (endoscopic closure VS laparoscopic repair 28463.55±8228.96rmb vs 61848.75±8812.12rmb, p < 0.001) and inpatient days (endoscopic closure VS laparoscopic repair 10.50±3.49days vs. 16.95±4.58days, P < 0.01), while there is no significant difference in terms of technical difficulty and effects (P > 0.05). Conclusion: With the training and technical progress of endoscopic closure, it is safe, effective and quick in recovery to have non-laparoscopic assisted surgery on gastric wall closure.