BACKGROUND: The stapled hemorrhoidopexy (SH) is a procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids . At first SH seemed to be a good alternative for the Milligan Morgan (MM) hemorrhoidectomy and preliminary results in early 2000 confirmed it. However, further studies and evaluation of long-term results showed poorer outcomes. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate and compare the results of these 2 surgical procedures in terms of recovery, improvement of symptoms and incidence of complications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was conducted from April 2008 to August 2010. A total of 80 patients were divided into 2 groups of 40 each. In the SH group, there were 24 males (60%) and 16 females (40%) with a mean age of 48 ± 12.5 yrs. In the MM group, there were 30 males (75%) and 10 females (25%) with a mean age of 50.6 ± 17.3 yrs. Patients with grade 3 and 4 prolapsed hemorrhoids were entered in the study. Data were entered using SPSS software and analyzed using t-test and Chi-square test. RESULTS: The two groups had no significant difference in terms of age or sex. Duration of surgery was 35 ± 7 minutes in the SH and 23.6 ± 13.5 minutes in the MM group. This difference was statistically significant (P = 0.000). Post-operative pain and complete pain relief was slightly lower in the MM group (not significant). Hospital stay was significantly longer in the MM group (P = 0.003). Return to work was similar in both groups. Three patients in the SH group (7.5%) and 2 in the MM group (5%) had hemorrhoid recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Both techniques are efficient treatment methods for grade III and IV hemorrhoids and are associated with greater than 95% recovery rate. Overall, outcomes are the same in both techniques. Lower postoperative pain was the only advantage of SH over MM technique.
BACKGROUND: The stapled hemorrhoidopexy (SH) is a procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids . At first SH seemed to be a good alternative for the Milligan Morgan (MM) hemorrhoidectomy and preliminary results in early 2000 confirmed it. However, further studies and evaluation of long-term results showed poorer outcomes. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate and compare the results of these 2 surgical procedures in terms of recovery, improvement of symptoms and incidence of complications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was conducted from April 2008 to August 2010. A total of 80 patients were divided into 2 groups of 40 each. In the SH group, there were 24 males (60%) and 16 females (40%) with a mean age of 48 ± 12.5 yrs. In the MM group, there were 30 males (75%) and 10 females (25%) with a mean age of 50.6 ± 17.3 yrs. Patients with grade 3 and 4 prolapsed hemorrhoids were entered in the study. Data were entered using SPSS software and analyzed using t-test and Chi-square test. RESULTS: The two groups had no significant difference in terms of age or sex. Duration of surgery was 35 ± 7 minutes in the SH and 23.6 ± 13.5 minutes in the MM group. This difference was statistically significant (P = 0.000). Post-operative pain and complete pain relief was slightly lower in the MM group (not significant). Hospital stay was significantly longer in the MM group (P = 0.003). Return to work was similar in both groups. Three patients in the SH group (7.5%) and 2 in the MM group (5%) had hemorrhoid recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Both techniques are efficient treatment methods for grade III and IV hemorrhoids and are associated with greater than 95% recovery rate. Overall, outcomes are the same in both techniques. Lower postoperative pain was the only advantage of SH over MM technique.
Authors: Jean François Gravié; Paul-Antoine Lehur; Noël Huten; Marc Papillon; Michel Fantoli; Bernard Descottes; Patrick Pessaux; Jean-Pierre Arnaud Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2005-07 Impact factor: 12.969