Literature DB >> 11156449

Stapled hemorrhoidectomy--cost and effectiveness. Randomized, controlled trial including incontinence scoring, anorectal manometry, and endoanal ultrasound assessments at up to three months.

Y H Ho1, W K Cheong, C Tsang, J Ho, K W Eu, C L Tang, F Seow-Choen.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Stapled hemorrhoidectomy is performed without leaving painful perianal wounds. The aim of this study was to assess any benefits, compared with a conventional open diathermy technique.
METHODS: A total of 119 consecutive patients with prolapsed irreducible hemorrhoids were randomly assigned (conventional open diathermy technique = 62; stapled hemorrhoidectomy = 57). Preoperative fecal incontinence scoring, anorectal manometry, and endoanal ultrasound were performed. Postoperatively, these were repeated at up to three months with pain scores, analgesic requirements, quality of life assessment, and total related medical costs.
RESULTS: Conventional open diathermy technique was quicker to perform (mean, 11.4 (standard error of the mean, 0.9) vs. 17.6 (3.1) minutes). Hospitalization was similar, but conventional open diathermy technique patients felt more pain during defecation (5.1 (0.4) vs. 2.6 (0.4); P < 0.005) at two weeks, and analgesic requirements were more for up to six weeks (P < 0.05). Up to the latter, 85.5 percent conventional open diathermy technique wounds remained unhealed, with more bleeding (33 (53.2 percent) vs. 19 (33.3 percent); P < 0.05) and pruritus (27 (43.5 percent) vs. 9 (15.8 percent); P < 0.05). Total complication rates were similar (conventional open diathermy technique 16 (25.8 percent) vs. stapled hemorrhoidectomy 10 (17.5 percent)), including mild strictures and bleeding in both groups. Minor incontinence occurred postoperatively in two conventional open diathermy technique and two stapled hemorrhoidectomy patients at six weeks. Endoanal ultrasound internal anal sphincter defects were found in the incontinent conventional open diathermy technique patients, but were asymptomatic in another one conventional open diathermy technique and one stapled hemorrhoidectomy. Only one patient (conventional open diathermy technique with internal sphincter defect) remained incontinent at three months. Changes between preoperative and postoperative anorectal manometry were similar in the two groups. Patients' satisfaction scores and quality of life assessments were also similar. Conventional open diathermy technique patients resumed work later (mean 22.9 (1.8) vs. 17.1 (1.9) days; P < 0.05), but the total costs incurred were less ($921.17 (16.85) vs. $1,283.09 (31.59); P < 0.005).
CONCLUSIONS: Stapled hemorrhoidectomy is a safe and effective option in treating irreducible prolapsed piles. It is more expensive but less painful, with less time needed off work. Nonetheless, long-term results are still awaited.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11156449     DOI: 10.1007/BF02236847

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum        ISSN: 0012-3706            Impact factor:   4.585


  56 in total

Review 1.  Advanced technology in the management of hemorrhoids: stapling, laser, harmonic scalpel, and ligasure.

Authors:  James Fleshman
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2002 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.452

2.  Dynamic imaging of pelvic floor with transperineal sonography.

Authors:  J J O'Connor
Journal:  Tech Coloproctol       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 3.781

3.  Can the procedure for prolapsing hemorrhoids (PPH) be done twice? Results of a porcine model.

Authors:  O Zmora; P Colquhoun; S Abramson; E G Weiss; J Efron; A M Vernava; J J Nogueras; S D Wexner
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2004-01-23       Impact factor: 4.584

4.  Randomized clinical trial of stapled hemorrhoidectomy vs open with Ligasure for prolapsed piles.

Authors:  G Basdanis; V N Papadopoulos; A Michalopoulos; S Apostolidis; N Harlaftis
Journal:  Surg Endosc       Date:  2004-12-02       Impact factor: 4.584

5.  Rectal stenosis after procedures for prolapse and hemorrhoids (PPH)--a report from China.

Authors:  Liqin Yao; Yunshi Zhong; Jianmin Xu; Meidong Xu; Pinghong Zhou
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 6.  Stapled haemorrhoidopexy compared to Milligan-Morgan and Ferguson haemorrhoidectomy: a systematic review.

Authors:  K Laughlan; D G Jayne; D Jackson; F Rupprecht; G Ribaric
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2008-11-27       Impact factor: 2.571

7.  Is simple mucosal resection really possible? Considerations about histological findings after stapled hemorrhoidopexy.

Authors:  Gabriele Naldini; Jacopo Martellucci; Luca Moraldi; Nicola Romano; Mauro Rossi
Journal:  Int J Colorectal Dis       Date:  2009-01-24       Impact factor: 2.571

8.  Stapled hemorrhoidopexy: the argument for usage.

Authors:  Marc Singer; Herand Abcarian
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2004-05

9.  Hemorrhoids.

Authors:  Amy Halverson
Journal:  Clin Colon Rectal Surg       Date:  2007-05

10.  Stapled hemorrhoidectomy: initial experience of a Latin American group.

Authors:  Angelita Habr-Gama; Afonso H S e Sous; José Manuel Correia Roveló; Jayme Vital Santos Souza; Fernando Benício; Francisco S P Regadas; Cláudio Wainstein; Túlio Marcos Rodrigues da Cunha; Carlos Frederico S Marques; Renato Bonardi; José Reinan Ramos; Luiz Cláudio Pandini; Desidério Kiss
Journal:  J Gastrointest Surg       Date:  2003 Sep-Oct       Impact factor: 3.452

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.