OBJECTIVES: To assess the long-term results of stapled hemorrhoidopexy (SH) compared with conventional hemorrhoidectomy (CH) and to define the role of SH in the treatment of hemorrhoids. DATA SOURCES: Published randomized controlled trials of CH vs SH with a minimum clinical follow-up of 12 months were searched and selected in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases using the keywords hemorrhoid, stapl, and anopexy, without language restrictions. STUDY SELECTION: Potentially relevant studies were identified by the title and the abstract, and full articles were obtained and assessed in detail. DATA EXTRACTION: Studies were scored according to the presence of 3 key methodologic features of randomization, blinding, and accountability of all patients, including withdrawals, and the scores ranged from 0 to 5. Studies that received a score from 3 to 5 were considered high-quality studies, whereas those with a score of 2 or less were considered of low quality. A specifically designed data form was used to collect all relevant data, including details of the experimental design, patient demographics, technical aspects, outcome measures, and complications. DATA SYNTHESIS: Fifteen articles met the inclusion criteria for a total of 1201 patients. Outcomes at a minimum of 1 year showed a significantly higher rate of prolapse recurrences in the SH group (14 studies, 1063 patients; odds ratio, 5.5; P < .001) and patients were more likely to undergo further treatment to correct recurrent prolapses compared with the CH group (10 studies, 824 patients; odds ratio, 1.9; P = .02). CONCLUSION: Stapled hemorrhoidopexy is a safe technique for the treatment of hemorrhoids but carries a significantly higher incidence of recurrences and additional operations compared with CH. It is the patient's choice whether to accept a higher recurrence rate to take advantage of the short-term benefits of SH.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the long-term results of stapled hemorrhoidopexy (SH) compared with conventional hemorrhoidectomy (CH) and to define the role of SH in the treatment of hemorrhoids. DATA SOURCES: Published randomized controlled trials of CH vs SH with a minimum clinical follow-up of 12 months were searched and selected in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases using the keywords hemorrhoid, stapl, and anopexy, without language restrictions. STUDY SELECTION: Potentially relevant studies were identified by the title and the abstract, and full articles were obtained and assessed in detail. DATA EXTRACTION: Studies were scored according to the presence of 3 key methodologic features of randomization, blinding, and accountability of all patients, including withdrawals, and the scores ranged from 0 to 5. Studies that received a score from 3 to 5 were considered high-quality studies, whereas those with a score of 2 or less were considered of low quality. A specifically designed data form was used to collect all relevant data, including details of the experimental design, patient demographics, technical aspects, outcome measures, and complications. DATA SYNTHESIS: Fifteen articles met the inclusion criteria for a total of 1201 patients. Outcomes at a minimum of 1 year showed a significantly higher rate of prolapse recurrences in the SH group (14 studies, 1063 patients; odds ratio, 5.5; P < .001) and patients were more likely to undergo further treatment to correct recurrent prolapses compared with the CH group (10 studies, 824 patients; odds ratio, 1.9; P = .02). CONCLUSION: Stapled hemorrhoidopexy is a safe technique for the treatment of hemorrhoids but carries a significantly higher incidence of recurrences and additional operations compared with CH. It is the patient's choice whether to accept a higher recurrence rate to take advantage of the short-term benefits of SH.