Literature DB >> 21694829

Do we at all need surgery to treat thrombosed external hemorrhoids? Results of a prospective cohort study.

Ole Gebbensleben1, York Hilger, Henning Rohde.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: It is unknown whether surgery is the gold standard for therapy of thrombosed external hemorrhoids (TEH).
METHODS: A prospective cohort study of 72 adults with TEH was conducted: no surgery, no sitz baths but gentle dry cleaning with smooth toilet paper after defecation. Follow-up information was collected six months after admission by questionnaire.
RESULTS: Despite our strict conservative management policy 62.5% (45/72) of patients (95% confidence interval [CI]: 51.0-74.0) described themselves as "healed" or "ameliorated", and 61.1% (44/72, 95% CI: 49.6-72.6) found our management policy as "valuable to test" or "impracticable". 13.9% (10/72, 95% CI: 5.7-22.1) of patients suspected to have recurrences. 4.2% did not know. Twenty-two of the 48 responding patients reported symptoms such as itching (18.8%), soiling (12.5%), pricking (10.4%), or a sore bottom (8.3%) once a month (59.1%, 13/22), once a week (27.3%, 6/22), or every day (13.6%, 3/22).
CONCLUSIONS: The dictum that surgery is the gold standard for therapy for TEH should be checked by randomized controlled trials.

Entities:  

Keywords:  acute hemorrhoidal disease; conservative therapy; hemorrhoids; perianal thrombosis; surgery; thrombosed external hemorrhoid

Year:  2009        PMID: 21694829      PMCID: PMC3108631          DOI: 10.2147/ceg.s5986

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Exp Gastroenterol        ISSN: 1178-7023


Introduction

Symptoms of benign anal diseases like internal hemorrhoids rank among the most common complaints of patients seen in primary care practices.1–4 Etiology of thrombosed external hemorrhoid (TEH) is unknown.5–8 Synonyms for thrombosed external hemorrhoid are acute thrombosed external hemorrhoid,8,9 acute hemorrhoidal disease,10 anal hematoma,11,12 perianal hematoma,13,14 thrombosed haemorrhoid,15 hemorrhoidal thrombosis,7,12 or perianal thrombosis.16,17 It was suggested to rename the disease “perianal thrombosis” to make it distinguishable from hemorrhoids since a causal connection is unproven.17 Histologically, thrombi are found in perianal veins, not in subcutaneous tissue and7,14,15,17 the term “hematoma” is wrong.2,12–14,17 TEH has two main modalities of clinical presentation: as a common single external pile or as a circular thrombosis of external hemorrhoids. This paper is concerned with a single TEH only following Hancock’s definition of “an acute localized thrombosis which may affect the external plexus”.2 TEH occurs accidentally and understandably patients take fright.2,3,17,19 As therapy, physicians inject local anesthesia into anal skin which is very painful, do an incision or excision, and then take thrombi out.2,7,15–17,20,21 Is this necessary? Only a minority of such patients present with formidable swelling, fierce bleeding, and overwhelming pain. Because patients fear surgery, they wait and observe their symptoms. Sometimes they present hours, even days after onset with less swelling, less pain, and no bleeding. Because swelling vanishes, a thrombus must not perforate anal skin, which means no bleeding, and may disappear within two to three weeks by resorption. There are no randomized controlled trials comparing surgical and conservative management of THE,7,15,16,20 but surgical management is the gold standard10,20,22 if the condition is encountered within the first 72 hours after onset3,23 or fails to respond to conservative treatment.2,8,18 What happens when a strict conservative management is started with painkillers, a wait-and-see policy, and dry anal cleaning after motions24,25 independent of stage of TEH at presentation?

Methods

Patients with TEH of both sex, aged 16–80 years, presenting at our office from March 18th, 2004 to August 18th, 2005 referred from general practitioners (GPs), physicians, urologists, or gynecologists because of anal complaints such pain or bleeding, were consecutively enrolled. After proctologic assessment in knee–chest position26 we informed patients that they had a benign lesion which would not need surgery. It would heal if patients were willing to accept our strict management policy: no water, shower, bath, washcloth, wet wipes, soap, or shower gel, but smooth dry toilet paper for anal cleaning after defecation for one to two weeks, and body cleaning without shower or bath tube but as often as wished with water, soap, or shower gel with an accepted washcloth for their inflamed anal skin to protect it against unknown etiologic factors which might postpone healing.24,25

Questionnaires

Individuals were asked to complete questionnaires with given answers about anal history and symptoms at study entry (Table 1) and six months later at follow-up (Table 2).
Table 1

Patients’ questionnaire with given answers at study entry

Which symptom or sign did you experience entering our outpatient clinic?

Anal lump

Anal pain

Anal burning (baking)

Anal itching

Anal bleeding

Anal pricking

Anal soreness

Which symptom bothered you most?

Anal lump

Anal pain

Anal burning (baking)

Anal itching

Anal bleeding

Anal pricking

Anal soreness

How long have you suffered from these symptoms or signs?

A few days

Up to one week

Two to four weeks

Up to half a year

Up to one year or longer

Did you experience a painful lump earlier?

No

Yes

Once

Repeatedly

Unknown

Did you treat your lesion by yourself?

No

Yes

Did you assume that you had hemorrhoids?

No

Yes

Unknown

Were you under medical treatment for hemorrhoids when your painful lump appeared?

No

Yes

How do you clean your anus after defecation?

Dry toilet paper

Water

Wet wipes

Shower

With soap or shower gel

How often do you shower?

Not at all

At least every day

Once or twice a week

More than twice a week

Once a month

How often do you take a bath tube?

Not at all

At least every day

Once or twice a week

More than twice a week

Once a month

Table 2

Patients’ questionnaire with given answers at follow up

Which symptom or sign do you experience?

Anal lump

Anal pain

Anal burning (baking)

Anal itching

Anal bleeding

Anal pricking

Anal soreness

How often have you suffered from these symptoms within the last days?

I have no symptoms

Every day

Once a week

Once a month

Do you feel

Healed

Ameliorated

Or unchanged?

Do you think your anal lesion has healed?

No

Yes

Unknown

How long did you comply with our strict conservative management policy?

One week

More than one week

Not at all

Unknown

Did you experience a recurrence at the anus?

No

Yes, I suspected one

Unknown

What kind of therapy followed your suspected recurrence?

There was no recurrence

Surgery

Ointments and/or suppositories

I adopted your strict anal cleaning policy

What do you think about our strict conservative management policy?

Valuable to test

Intelligible

Incomprehensible

Impracticable

Unknown

How do you clean your anus after defecation?

Dry toilet paper

Water

Wet wipes

Shower

With soap or shower gel

How do you clean your body?

Shower

Bath tube

Wash cloth

How often do you shower?

Not at all

At least every day

Once or twice a week

More than twice a week

Once a month

How often do you take a bath tube?

Not at all

At least every day

Once or twice a week

More than twice a week

Once a month

Follow-up

Patients were instructed to return to our practice immediately in case of problems. We phoned them six months later to deliver our follow-up questionnaire since we would like to learn how they are and the course of healing of their TEH.

Statistics

We completed intention-to-treat analyses. To compare anal cleaning attitudes at start and six months later, McNemar’s test for related samples was used for significant difference for dichotomous variables and Wilcoxon signed-rank test for ordinal variables. P-values were computed using the exact versions of both tests. The Student’s t-test for independent variables was used to find out which individuals had fewer symptoms: those who followed our strict management policy “more than one week” or “one week or less”. We used SPSS software (v. 15.0.1.1; SPSS inc., Chicago, IL, USA).

Ethical guidelines

This study has been conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki (1964) and was conducted with the understanding and the consent of the patients.

Results

All 72 patients initially accepted our therapeutic regimen. Patient characteristics are summarized in Table 3.
Table 3

Patient characteristics at study entry

Number of patients72
Males (%)61
Germans (%)90
Height (mean, cm)
  Men180
  Women166
Weight (mean, kg)
  Men80
  Women65
BMI
  Men24.9
  Women23.4
Age (mean, years)43
  Men40
  Women46
Profession (%)
  Clerk42
  Self-employee26
  Trainee11
  Housewife8
  Pensioner7
  Worker6

Abbreviation: BMI, body mass index.

Two patients called on us in the first two weeks after admission because of healing problems: a 32-year-old man was dissatisfied with prolonged healing, but we persuaded him into continuing therapy. A 73-year-old lady was seen repeatedly because of recurrent anal bleeding because of TEH. She was happy with our treatment policy because she escaped surgery (Figures 1A–F).
Figure 1

All six photos are taken from the same patient. In three-day intervals, they show the healing of a perforated and bleeding single thrombosed external hemorrhoid within nine days of a patient who consequently complied to our strict conservative management policy. A) Day 0: The patient is in knee–chest position, head left. Right-lateral of the anus parts of the uninflamed external hemorrhoidal plexus are protruding. Left-lateral there is edematous tissue with a dark spot (nonperforated thrombosed external hemorrhoid) with a subcutaneous clot. B) Day 3: Perforation and anal bleeding occurred in between. Right-lateral of the anus parts of an unaltered external hemorrhoidal plexus are seen. Left-lateral redness and edema of inflamed anal skin perforated by two black clots. C) Day 6: The right-lateral parts of the external hemorrhoidal plexus remain unchanged. The left-lateral clots are still at same position. D) Day 6: Both clots were taken out. A gaping lesion remains at former perforation site. E) Day 9: A 2–4 mm healing lesion is seen at former perforation site. At right-lateral, unchanged parts of the external hemorrhoidal plexus. F) Day 32: At follow-up four weeks later, the left-lateral perforation can hardly be seen. At right-lateral, the uninflamed subcutaneous external hemorrhoidal plexus appears unchanged.

Median prevalence of TEH per month at our institution was 9 (5–14). A seasonal occurrence was found in springtime. Symptoms at admission were: anal lump (80.3%), pain (73.2%), burning (baking) (43.7%), itching (42.3%), bleeding (28.6%), pricking (26.8%), and/or anal soreness (16.9%). Patients were bothered most by pain (43.5%), lump (40.6%), and anal blood (8.7%). Onset of symptoms was within “some days” in 40.0% of patients, “one week” (34.3%), “four weeks” (12.9%), “half a year” (2.8%), and “one year or longer” (10.0%). Half of patients (50.7%) had not experienced a painful lump earlier, some once (27.5%), others repeatedly (21.7%). 54.9% of patients thought they might have hemorrhoids, 31.0% did not know, and 14.1% declined. 56.4% of patients with assumed hemorrhoids tried to treat themselves. 29.4% had been under medical treatment for so called hemorrhoids when TEH appeared. At the six-month follow-up (median, range 2–13 months) after admission only 48 out of 72 patients (66.7%) sent their questionnaire back. 62.5% (45/72, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 51.0–74.0) of patients described themselves as “healed” or “ameliorated”, and 4.2% (3/72, 95% CI: 0.0–8.9) as “unchanged”. Asked whether their lesion had healed meanwhile 45.8% (33/72, 95% CI: 34.0–57.6) of patients answered “no”, “undecided”, and “unknown”, and 54.2% (39/72, 95% CI: 42.4–66.0) of patients answered “yes”. Of patients, 61.1% (44/72, 95%CI: 49.6–72.6) argued that our conservative management policy is “valuable to test” or “understandable”, 5.6% (4/72, 95% CI: 0.0–11.0) found it “incomprehensible” or “impracticable”. Of our patients, 33.3% (24/72) did not answer. Twenty-two (45.8%) out of 48 patients who sent their questionnaire back reported at least one symptom: itching (18.8%), a lump or pricking (both 10.4%), pain (8.3%), sore anus (8.3%), bleeding (6.3%), burning (baking), weeping, mucous (each 4.2%). Symptoms appeared “once a month” (59.1%, 13/22), “once a week” (27.3%, 6/22), and “every day” (13.6%, 3/22). Patients complied with our strict management policy “more than one week” (37.5%, 27/72, 95% CI: 26.0–49.0), “one week” (25.0%, 18/72, 95% CI: 14.8–35.2), and “not at all” or “unknown” (37.5%, 95% CI: 26.0–49.0). Of our patients, 47.2% (34/72, 95% CI: 35.4–59.0) experienced no recurrences whereas 13.9% (10/72, 95% CI: 5.7–22.1) suspected a recurrence, 4.2% (3/72) of patients did not know, and 34.7% (25/72) of patients did not answer this question. Asked what kind of therapy followed their possible recurrence, patients answered: surgery (two patients), ointments and suppositories (two patients), and 13 patients remembered our anal cleaning policy which was adopted again. Comparing anal cleaning attitudes at start of study and six months later we found no change concerning use of dry toilet paper, wet wipes, shower, soap, or shower gel, besides a decline in use of wetted toilet paper (p = 0.004, exact significance two-tailed, McNemar test). On the contrary, use of shower and bath tube increased considerably (p = 0.01, Wilcoxon signed-rank test).

Discussion

Our study is small in patient numbers compared to others8,20,27 but has two advantages: data were gathered prospectively, and follow up period was short for all patients: six months (median, range: 2–13 months) with no range extending up to 4,8 5,20 or 1227 years. Disadvantages are: results were obtained by questionnaire only as with others20 due to the German insurance system which does not allow to see referred patients for follow-up, and regrettably only two thirds of patients (48/72; 66.7%) sent their follow up questionnaire back. According to the intention-to-treat analysis we calculated these 24 nonresponders as drop-outs. TEH is common in young persons8,20 which complies with our series mean age being 43 years. Incidence was higher in male than in female patients like with others8,20 the ratio being 2:1. Similarly to other reports,17,27 half of our patients (50.7%) had a prior history of TEH which might emphasize our suspicion that pruritus ani/perianal anitis1 is the determining precursor of TEH24,25 largely underdiagnosed according to type of proctological assessment.26 At follow-up, the most frequent complain in our series was itching (21.4%). This signifies that anal inflammation1,24,25 is still a problem when TEH has healed. Patients whose initial presentations were pain or bleeding with or without a lump were more like to be treated surgically27 if encountered within the first 72 hours.3,8,23 Since only 40.0% of our patients sought medical help within “some days” after onset of symptoms but the majority (60.0%) later after “one week or more” most of them did not fulfill current prerequisites for surgery.3,8,16,20,23 Most of our patients sought medical help only when THE was healing. Early complications of surgery are postoperative bleeding, urinary retention, painful defecation,15,20 and abscess/fistula.20 Late complications include anal stenosis.16 Even though a possible advantage of surgery might be more rapid symptom resolution, lower incidence of recurrence, and longer remission intervals27 why should we expose our patients to such risks “since the condition is usually self-limiting and subsides in a few days to a week?”8 Recurrences were found to be less frequent after surgical (6.3%) compared to conservative treatment (25.4%) in a retrospective study.27 One cause might be that patients who had surgery timidly tried to avoid another operation and therefore neglected to present themselves to their surgeon again. The rate of suspected recurrence in our series was high (10/48, 21.3%). Indeed typical complaints distinctive of recurrent TEH were rare: lump (10.4%), pain (8.3%), and bleeding (6.3%). Therefore, recurrences with our patients seem rather unlikely but anal inflammation is supposable announced by itching (18.8%), pricking (10.4%), and a sore anus (8.3%).24,25,28 Patient attitudes against our treatment policy did not influence therapeutic results since the majority of patients characterized it as “valuable to test” or “understandable” (61.1%). These patients had no better results than those who found it “incomprehensible” or “impractical”. After all, two young men had surgery. Both sought advice on the Internet about common treatments of TEH because they were discontent with our strict conservative management policy unlike our tolerating 73-year-old female patient (Figures 1A–F). Our study indicates that a strict conservative management policy for TEH can be successful since only 5.6% of patients found it “incomprehensible” or “impractical”. Randomized controlled trials with long follow ups are needed, which may ultimately result in current surgical management policies for TEH being abandoned.
  27 in total

1.  Treatment of anal fissure.

Authors:  Richard L Nelson
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2003-08-16

Review 2.  Office treatment of haemorrhoids and perianal haematoma.

Authors:  A Iseli
Journal:  Aust Fam Physician       Date:  1991-03

3.  Perianal thrombosis.

Authors:  S Brearley; R Brearley
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  1988-05       Impact factor: 4.585

4.  [Hemorrhoidal thrombosis. A clinical and therapeutical study on 22 consecutive patients].

Authors:  Fabio Gaj; Antonello Trecca; Marianna Suppa; Massimo Sposato; Alessandro Coppola; Gaetano De Paola; Francesco Aguglia
Journal:  Chir Ital       Date:  2006 Mar-Apr

5.  Urgent hemorrhoidectomy for hemorrhoidal thrombosis.

Authors:  G Barrios; M Khubchandani
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  1979-04       Impact factor: 4.585

Review 6.  Primary care office management of perianal and anal disease.

Authors:  D Nagle; R H Rolandelli
Journal:  Prim Care       Date:  1996-09       Impact factor: 2.907

7.  Conservative treatment of acute thrombosed external hemorrhoids with topical nifedipine.

Authors:  P Perrotti; C Antropoli; D Molino; G De Stefano; M Antropoli
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 4.585

8.  Thrombosed external hemorrhoids: outcome after conservative or surgical management.

Authors:  Jose Greenspon; Stephen B Williams; Heather A Young; Bruce A Orkin
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2004-08-12       Impact factor: 4.585

9.  Excision of thrombosed external hemorrhoid under local anesthesia: a retrospective evaluation of 340 patients.

Authors:  Johannes Jongen; Sebastian Bach; Sven Henrik Stübinger; Jens-Uwe Bock
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 4.585

10.  The outpatient management of acute hemorrhoidal disease.

Authors:  T Eisenstat; E P Salvati; R J Rubin
Journal:  Dis Colon Rectum       Date:  1979 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 4.585

View more
  3 in total

1.  Portuguese Society of Gastroenterology Consensus on the Diagnosis and Management of Hemorrhoidal Disease.

Authors:  Paulo Salgueiro; Ana Célia Caetano; Ana Maria Oliveira; Bruno Rosa; Miguel Mascarenhas-Saraiva; Paula Ministro; Pedro Amaro; Rogério Godinho; Rosa Coelho; Rúben Gaio; Samuel Fernandes; Vítor Fernandes; Fernando Castro-Poças
Journal:  GE Port J Gastroenterol       Date:  2019-09-05

2.  Perianal thrombosis: no need for surgery.

Authors:  Ingo Alldinger; Zoe Poschinski; Silke Ganzera; Christian Helmes
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2022-01-22       Impact factor: 3.445

Review 3.  Management and Treatment of External Hemorrhoidal Thrombosis.

Authors:  Arcangelo Picciariello; Marcella Rinaldi; Ugo Grossi; Luigi Verre; Michele De Fazio; Agnese Dezi; Giovanni Tomasicchio; Donato F Altomare; Gaetano Gallo
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2022-05-03
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.