| Literature DB >> 29170839 |
Carlo Ratto1, Paola Campennì2, Francesco Papeo2, Lorenza Donisi2, Francesco Litta2, Angelo Parello2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization (THD) Doppler procedure is a minimally invasive technique to treat symptomatic hemorrhoids. The aim of the study was to assess the clinical efficacy and the satisfaction of patients in a large series treated with THD and to review the relevant literature.Entities:
Keywords: Hemorrhoids; Mucopexy; Surgical management hemorrhoidal disease; Transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29170839 PMCID: PMC5830492 DOI: 10.1007/s10151-017-1726-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Tech Coloproctol ISSN: 1123-6337 Impact factor: 3.781
Fig. 1Flow diagram of the surgical treatment
Intra- and postoperative results
| No. of patients | % | |
|---|---|---|
| Device used | ||
| First model device | 101 | 10.1 |
| Second model device (THD Surgy) | 36 | 3.6 |
| Third model device (THD Slide) | 863 | 86.3 |
| Concomitant surgical procedures | ||
| Skin tag(s) removal | 145 | 14.5 |
| Lateral internal sphincterotomy | 103 | 10.3 |
| Fistulotomy | 10 | 1 |
| Total | 243 | 24.3 |
| Mortality | 0 | 0 |
| Morbidity (≤ 30 postop days) | ||
| Pain/tenesmus | 31 | 3.1 |
| Urinary retention | 23 | 2.3 |
| Bleeding | 14 | 1.4 |
| Total | 68 | 6.8 |
Fig. 2Results of symptoms-based questionnaire at preoperative evaluation (baseline) and last visit (follow-up): distribution of patients (percentage). Statistics: marginal homogeneity test; for each item, baseline versus follow-up: p < 0.0001
Recurrence following THD Doppler procedure: distribution based on the preoperative Goligher classification of hemorrhoidal disease
| Type of failure | Hemorrhoidal disease grade |
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| II | III | IV | Overall | ||
| Bleeding | 2 (2.4) | 10 (1.2) | 0 | 12 (1.2) | 0.355 |
| Prolapse | 1 (1.2) | 37 (4.4) | 8 (9.6) | 46 (4.6) | 0.030 |
| Bleeding and prolapse | 4 (4.9) | 26 (3.1) | 7 (8.4) | 37 (3.7) | 0.042 |
| Overall failure | 7 (8.5) | 73 (8.7) | 15 (18.1) | 95 (9.5) | 0.021 |
aChi-square test
Uni-/multivariate analysis of factors affecting the final outcome following THD Doppler procedure
| Factors | Univariate analysis |
| Multivariate analysis |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age < 40 years | 2.004 (1.284–3.128) | 0.002 | 1.945 (1.234–3.065) | 0.004 |
| Male | 1.010 (0.653–1.561) | 0.965 | ||
| Baseline grade 4 hemorrhoidal diseasea | 2.308 (1.261–4.223) | 0.005 | 2.367 (1.261–4.442) | 0.007 |
| First device usage | 1.472 (0.788–2.750) | 0.223 | ||
| Second device usage | 1.966 (0.797–4.852) | 0.135 | ||
| Third device usage | 0.600 (0.350–1.028) | 0.060 | 0.949 (0.485–1.855) | 0.878 |
| High ligation of arteries | 2.155 (1.375–3.377) | 0.001 | 1.881 (1.083–3.269) | 0.025 |
| No morbidity within 30 days | 1.508 (0.694–3.279) | 0.296 | ||
| Follow-up < 12 months | 0.447 (0.160–1.249) | 0.115 | 0.613 (0.216–1.744) | 0.359 |
aGoligher classification
Results of the analyzed cohort studies
| Study | No. patients | Operation time (min.) | No. ligatedarteries | Postoperative complications | Follow-up (months) | Recurrence rate (%) | Symptoms at follow-up | Reoperation rate (%) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pain (%) | Bleeding (%) | Thrombosis (%) | Fissure (%) | Bleeding (%) | Prolapse (%) | Pain (%) | |||||||
| Dal Monte [ | 330 (grades 2–3–4) | n.a. | n.a. | 19† | 2 | 1.5 | 0.6 | 46 (22–79) | 7.5 | 3 | 2.7 | n.a. | n.a. |
| Festen et al. [ | 23 (grades 2–3) | 34 | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. | 1.5 | 17 | 4.3 | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. |
| Ratto et al. [ | 170 (grades 2–3–4) | 20 ± 5.30 ± 10 (with RAR) | 6 | 15.9 | 1.2 | 2.3 | n.a. | 11.5 ± 12 (1–41) | n.a. | 6.5 | 10.5 | 0 | 4.1 |
| Infantino [ | 112 (grades 2–3) | 33.9 ± 8.8 | 7.2 ± 1.5 | 28.6 | 0.9 | 2.7 | n.a. | 15.6 ± 6.5 (6–32) | 14.3 | 20 | 6.3 | 3.6 | 12.5 |
| Rattoet al. [ | 35 (grade 4) | 33 ± 12 | 6 | 14.3 | 5.7 | 8.6 | n.a. | 10 (6–28) | n.a. | 25.7 | 28.6 | 8.6 | 5.7 |
| Giordano et al. [ | 28 (grades 2–3) | 30 (20–45) | n.a. | 0 | 0 | n.a. | n.a. | 38 (33–48) | 14 | 4 | 11 | n.a. | n.a. |
| Schuurman et al. [ | 38 (grades 2–3) | n.a. | 5.2 ± 0.71 | 0 | 2.6 | 2.6 | n.a. | 6 | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. | 13.2 |
| Infantino et al. [ | 85 (grade 3) | n.a. | n.a. | 5.9 | 2.4 | n.a. | 17 ± 0.4 (15–20) | 14 | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. | 11.3 | |
| Zampieriet al. [ | 46 (grades 3–4) | 20 ± 5.1 | n.a. | 6.5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. |
| Denoya et al. [ | 20 (grades 3–4) | 36.6 ± 12.7 | 6 | 10 | 10 | 0 | 0 | 35 (27–43) | 16.7 | 16.7 | 16.7 | 8.3 | 8.3 |
| Elmér et al. [ | 20 (grades 2–3) | 36 (30–45) | 6 | 5 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 12 | 20.0 | 15.0 | 20.0 | 10–0 | 10.0 |
| De Nardi et al. [ | 25 (grade 3) | 25 ± 10 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 24 | 12.5 | 4.2 | 0 | 16.6 | 4.2 |
| Giordano et al. [ | 31 (grade 4) | 32 (23–47) | 6 (5–8) | 71 | 0 | 3.2 | 0 | 32 (6–58) | 3.2 | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. | 3.2 |
| Tempel et al. [ | 216 (grade n.a.) | n.a. | n.a. | 10.4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 23 (1–42) | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. |
| Béliard et al. [ | 54 (grades 2–3) | n.a. | n.a. | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 24 | 9.3 | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. |
| Ratto et al. [ | 803 (grades: 2–3–4) | 34.3 ± 5.9 (24–47) | 6 | 13 | 2.2 | 0.5 | 0.1 | 11.1 ± 9.2 (3–57) | 9.3 | 3.0 | 6.9 | 0 | 5.6 |
| LaBella et al. [ | 108 (grades 2–3–4) | n.a. | 6 | 8 | 13 | 0 | 0 | 12 | 10.3 | 0 | 10.3 | 0 | 10.3 |
| Rubbini et al. [ | 106 (grades 3–4) | 25 (16–65) | n.a. | 35 | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. | n.a. |
Comparative trials comparing THD Doppler procedure with other techniques
| Study | No. patients, grade | Compared procedure | Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|
| Festen et al. [ | Total: 23 | PPH | No significant difference in complications. However, significantly shorter operative time for DGHL (23 vs. 34 min, |
| Giordano et al. [ | Total: 28 | PPH | No significant difference in pain, operative time, complications, or recurrence rate. Patients returned to normal activities faster after DGHL (3.2 vs. 6.3 days, |
| Schuurman et al. [ | Total: 38 (grades 2–3) | HL | No significant difference in patient-reported severity of bleeding, pain, defecation problems, and discomfort. Greater improvement in prolapse symptoms in non-Doppler group ( |
| Infantino et al. [ | Total: 85 (grade 3) | PPH | No significant difference in pain, postoperative complications, recurrence, or reoperation rates. Higher rate of late complications for PPH ( |
| Zampieriet al. [ | Total: 46 | Ligasure hemorrhoidectomy | In DGHL group, lower length of procedure (20 ± 5.1 vs. 28 ± 4.2 min, |
| Elmér et al. [ | Total: 20 | MMH | Postop peak pain lower in DGHL during first week ( |
| Denoya et al. [ | Total: 20 | Ferguson hemorrhoidectomy | In DGHL group, lower postop narcotics use (25 vs. 100%, |
| Denoya et al. [ | Total: 12 | Ferguson hemorrhoidectomy | In DGHL group, similar recurrence rate (16.7 vs. 6.7%, |
| De Nardi et al. [ | Total: 25 (grade 3) | MMH | Similar pain level by 30th postop day. In DGH, shorter work resumption and higher patient satisfaction, but not significantly. Similar recurrence rates needing additional surgery (4.2 vs. 4.2%, |
| Béliard et al. [ | Total: 54 (grade 2) | PPH | In DGHL group, shorter disability for work (4.4 ± 6.6 vs. 18.6 ± 13.7, |
PPH procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids (stapled hemorrhoidopexy); HL hemorrhoidal artery ligation (without Doppler guidance); DGHL Doppler-guided hemorrhoidal artery ligation; MMH Milligan–Morgan hemorrhoidectomy; QoL quality of life