Diagnosis: Perforated peptic ulcer (most likely a perforated duodenal ulcer) with generalized peritonitis
The clinical picture — sudden severe epigastric pain, vomiting, and board-like abdominal rigidity in a middle-aged male — is the classic presentation of a perforated peptic ulcer. Acid/gastric content spilling into the peritoneal cavity causes chemical peritonitis first, followed by bacterial peritonitis within hours (Bailey and Love's Short Practice of Surgery, 28th ed., p. 1186). Other differentials to keep in mind (acute pancreatitis, acute cholecystitis, ruptured AAA, mesenteric ischemia) should be considered, but the acute "board-like" rigidity strongly favors a perforated hollow viscus.
Why the erect CXR can be normal despite perforation
A normal erect CXR does not exclude perforation. Free sub-diaphragmatic air is seen in only about 50-75% of confirmed cases (Bailey and Love, p. 1186; Fischer's Mastery of Surgery, 8th ed.). Reasons for a false-negative film in this scenario include:
- Small or "sealed" perforation — omentum, adjacent liver, or an inflammatory adhesion plugs the defect quickly, limiting the amount of gas that escapes (self-limiting/contained perforation).
- Insufficient time upright — the patient needs to sit/stand for about 10 minutes before the film is taken to let air rise to the highest point (under the diaphragm); if imaged too soon, air may not have migrated there yet.
- Retroperitoneal perforation — a posterior duodenal ulcer can perforate into the retroperitoneum rather than the free peritoneal cavity, producing no pneumoperitoneum (may instead show retroperitoneal gas or a hazy right psoas outline).
- Very small volume of gas — a fresh, pinpoint perforation may release too little air (plain film can detect as little as 10-20 mL, but even this threshold can be missed).
- Technical/interpretive pitfalls — a gastric air bubble or Chilaiditi's syndrome (bowel interposed between liver and diaphragm) can also confuse interpretation, though these cause false positives rather than negatives.
- Patient too unwell to sit erect, resulting in a suboptimal or supine film.
Best next investigation: Contrast-enhanced CT of the abdomen and pelvis
CT is now the investigation of choice when there is strong clinical suspicion but an equivocal or normal CXR. It can detect even tiny amounts of intraperitoneal free air, localize the site of perforation, and identify the underlying cause (peptic ulcer vs. diverticulitis vs. malignancy vs. other) (Bailey and Love, p. 159). Oral or rectal contrast is not required — the diagnosis of free air/perforation itself is what drives management, and barium studies are absolutely contraindicated if a leak is suspected. A serum amylase/lipase should also be checked to help exclude acute pancreatitis, which can mimic this presentation and occasionally coexists (Bailey and Love, p. 1186).
Definitive management
1. Immediate resuscitation (while arranging surgery)
- IV crystalloid resuscitation, correct electrolytes
- Nasogastric tube decompression
- Broad-spectrum IV antibiotics (covering gram-negative and anaerobic organisms) and IV proton pump inhibitor
- Analgesia (should not be withheld — adequate analgesia makes signs clearer, not more confusing)
- Urinary catheter and close monitoring; NPO
2. Surgery — the mainstay of definitive treatment
- Emergency laparotomy (or increasingly, laparoscopy) through an upper midline incision (or laparoscopic ports)
- Omental ("Graham") patch repair: the perforation is closed with interrupted sutures and a tongue of vascularized omentum is laid over/into the defect to seal it, followed by thorough peritoneal lavage and toileting to wash out spilled gastric contents and debris (Sabiston Textbook of Surgery, p. 2140-2141; Fischer's Mastery of Surgery, 8th ed.)
- For larger perforations or ulcers with friable/fibrotic edges that cannot be closed without tension, a larger omental patch or, rarely, a more definitive resection (partial gastrectomy) may be needed, especially if malignancy is suspected in a gastric ulcer (biopsy the ulcer edge)
- Laparoscopic repair is now supported by recent randomized-trial meta-analyses as at least equivalent to, and in some outcomes better than, open repair (shorter hospital stay, fewer wound complications), though with longer operative time — reasonable in hemodynamically stable patients when laparoscopic expertise is available.
- Selected, hemodynamically stable patients with a sealed perforation confirmed by CT/contrast study (no ongoing leak) may be managed non-operatively (Taylor's regimen: NG suction, IV antibiotics, PPI, close monitoring), but this is the exception, not the rule, and requires very close observation with a low threshold to operate if deterioration occurs.
3. Post-operative / long-term care
- Continue IV PPI, then transition to oral once tolerating feeds
- Test for and eradicate Helicobacter pylori if present
- Stop NSAIDs/aspirin where possible; address other risk factors (smoking, steroids)
- Ongoing surveillance endoscopy for gastric ulcers to exclude malignancy after healing
Recent evidence check: two 2025 systematic reviews/meta-analyses of RCTs (PMID 39361132, PMID 40217342) comparing laparoscopic versus open repair of perforated peptic ulcer support laparoscopic repair as at least non-inferior, with benefits in postoperative complications and length of stay — consistent with, and reinforcing, the textbook guidance above rather than contradicting it.