Comparison of Ligasure Hemorrhoidectomy with Conventional Ferguson's Hemorrhoidectomy

A Retrospective Study of Milligan-Morgan Versus LigaSure Hemorrhoidectomy in the Treatment of Symptomatic Hemorrhoids at an Institute in North India

Objective The present study aimed to assess and compare the surgical outcomes of hemorrhoidectomies performed using two different techniques: conventional Milligan-Morgan and another popular vessel sealing approach of LigaSure hemorrhoidectomy. Methods This retrospective study was conducted at our tertiary care hospital and involved patients who underwent either of the surgical procedures from June 2016 to March 2022. The patient demographics and data on the duration of operation, hospital stay, and postoperative recovery were collected and evaluated. Results Of the 91 cases reviewed, a total of 44 patients underwent Milligan-Morgan open hemorrhoidectomy and 47 had LigaSure hemorrhoidectomy. The mean operative time was significantly shorter for LigaSure hemorrhoidectomy (33.84 ±9.18 vs. 23.15 ±3.36 minutes for Milligan-Morgan and LigaSure, respectively, p<0.0001). Additionally, in comparison to Milligan-Morgan open hemorrhoidectomy, the LigaSure hemorrhoidectomy group exhibited a significant reduction in hospital stay (2.20 ±0.79 vs. 1.47 ±0.50 days), lower pain score [6.55 ±1.19 vs. 5.30 ±1.10 on the visual analog scale (VAS) on day one and 2.25 ±1.26 vs. 1.47 ±0.78 VAS on day seven], and faster return to normal activities (18.18 ±4.30 vs. 14.85 ±3.15 days). Conclusions When pitted against the traditional Milligan-Morgan method, the LigaSure approach to performing a hemorrhoidectomy is superior, owing to the shorter duration of operation, shorter hospital stays, lesser pain, and earlier return to normal activities. In light of these findings, surgeons may consider choosing this procedure to improve surgical outcomes and efficiency.

A retrospective comparative study of hemorrhoidal artery ligation versus ligasure hemorrhoidectomy for the third degree hemorrhoidal disease

BACKGROUND

Hemorrhoidal disease (HD) is the most common disease of the anorectal region. Excision of pathological hemorrhoidal structures by providing bipolar energy transfer with Ligasure, which is basically an electrosurgical device, is one of the treatment methods Ligasure hemorrhoidectomy (LH). In another method applied for the first time by Morinaga, the vascular plexus is provided by Doppler-guided ligation of the hemorrhoidal arteries (ADHL). In our study, we aimed to compare and evaluate the results of these two minimally invasive treatment methods.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients treated with ADHL and LH for HD in our Surgery Clinic were included in the study. Demographic data, complaints, number of hemorrhoidal structures, location, complications, operation time, bleeding during and after the operation, length of hospital stay, postoperative pain scoring, and postoperative results were evaluated from the patient files.

RESULTS

The number of patients included in the study was 91. While 54 patients were treated with ADHL (group 1), 37 patients (group 2) were treated with LH. Although the gender distribution between the groups was similar, there was male predominance in both groups. The mean operative time was shorter in group 1. The number of packages was 2.7 in group 1 and 2.4 in group 2. The mean hospital stay was 1.5 days in the ADHL-treated group, compared to. 3.05 days in the LH group. In the postoperative period, bleeding was not observed after an average of 1.4 days in group 1, while this period was 4.9 days in group 2. While recurrence occurred in 4 patients in the ADHL group, recurrence developed in 3 patients who underwent LH.

CONCLUSION

ADHL and LH techniques have advantages and disadvantages over each other. Although the ADHL technique seems to be superior to LH in terms of post-defecation pain and shorter hospital stay, prospective randomized controlled studies are needed to determine which method should be chosen in which patient.

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of different surgical procedures for patients with hemorrhoids: a network meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This study used a network meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of different surgical approaches in patients with hemorrhoids.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Web of science, and Cochrane Library were searched for randomized controlled trials on patients with hemorrhoids treated by different surgical procedures. The search was conducted until January 15, 2023. Two investigators independently screened the resulting literature, extracted information, evaluated the risk of bias of the included studies, and performed a network meta-analysis.

RESULT

A total of 23 randomized controlled studies were included and involved 3573 patients and 10 interventions, namely L (Ligasure), M-M (Milligan-Morgan), F (Ferguson), H (Harmonic), OH (open Harmonic), CH (closed Harmonic), PPH (procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids), TST (tissue selecting technique), T-S (TST STARE+; tissue selection therapy stapled transanal rectal resection plus), and STARR (stapled transanal rectal resection). Network meta-analysis results showed that L has the shortest mean operating time and STARR has the longest mean operating time, F and H have the longest length of hospitalization and T-S has the shortest length of hospitalization, PPH has the most intraoperative blood loss and L has the least intraoperative blood loss, TST has the shortest time to first defecation and M-M has the longest time to first defecation, STARR had the least recurrence and PPH had the most recurrence, PPH had the least anal stenosis and L had the most anal stenosis, and F had the least postoperative pain after 24 h and PPH had the most postoperative pain after 24 h.

CONCLUSION

Current evidence suggests that L is best at reducing mean operative time and intraoperative bleeding, T-S is best at reducing mean length of stay, TST has the shortest time to first defecation, STARR is best at reducing recurrence rates, PPH is best at reducing postoperative anal stricture, and F is best at reducing postoperative pain after 24 h.

Comparing outcomes of laser hemorrhoidoplasty and LigaSure hemorrhoidectomy in grade II-III hemorrhoidal disease: a retrospective analysis

BACKGROUND

Hemorrhoidal disease is a common ailment that presents a challenge in terms of standard treatment methods. Although surgical hemorrhoidectomy is often considered the gold standard, new surgical techniques have emerged, such as laser hemorrhoidoplasty and LigaSure hemorrhoidectomy, to address postoperative pain, bleeding, and extended return-to-work times. This study aims to compare the outcomes of laser hemorrhoidoplasty and LigaSure hemorrhoidectomy in patients with grade II-III hemorrhoidal disease.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted on a cohort of patients who underwent laser hemorrhoidoplasty or LigaSure hemorrhoidectomy. Data were collected on postoperative pain, complications, recurrence rates, and return-to-work times. The primary outcome was the difference in postoperative pain between the two groups, as assessed using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS).

RESULTS

Patients in the laser hemorrhoidoplasty group experienced significantly lower postoperative pain compared to those in the LigaSure hemorrhoidectomy group. Bleeding amounts during the operation were also significantly lower in the laser group. However, the recurrence rate was higher in the laser group compared to the LigaSure group (9.4% versus 2.5%). Return to work and normal activities time after laser hemorrhoidoplasty was shorter than after LigaSure hemorrhoidectomy.

CONCLUSION

Laser hemorrhoidoplasty is a minimally invasive technique that can be safely applied in suitable grade II-III patients, offering lower postoperative pain rates, fewer complications, and shorter return to work and normal activity times compared to LigaSure hemorrhoidectomy. However, recurrence rates are still higher for laser hemorrhoidoplasty. Future studies should explore the potential of combining laser hemorrhoidoplasty with other surgical treatments.

Modified ultrasound scalpel haemorrhoidectomy versus conventional haemorrhoidectomy for mixed haemorrhoids: a study protocol for a single-blind randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Haemorrhoids are common and frequently occurring diseases in the clinical setting, and severe haemorrhoids require surgical treatment. There are various surgical methods to treat haemorrhoids, but each has advantages and disadvantages. In recent years, ultrasonic scalpels have been used in haemorrhoid surgery and have achieved good results. Ultrasonic scalpel haemorrhoidectomy is safer and more effective in the surgical treatment of grade III and IV haemorrhoids, with less intraoperative bleeding, less postoperative pain, and fewer complications than diathermic therapy, electrosurgical haemorrhoidectomy, PROXIMATE® PPH haemorrhoidal circular stapler haemorrhoidopexy (PPH), and traditional haemorrhoidectomy. In previous reports, the majority of ultrasonic scalpel haemorrhoidectomies were performed as open procedures, with only the body of the haemorrhoid removed with the ultrasonic scalpel and the wound left open for drainage and natural healing. However, we performed a preliminary experiment with 12 patients who underwent open ultrasonic scalpel haemorrhoidectomy in the early stage. The results showed that 8 patients had different degrees of postoperative bleeding, and 4 of them required a second haemostatic surgery under anaesthesia. Therefore, we modified the open ultrasonic scalpel haemorrhoidectomy procedure by removing the mucosa of the internal haemorrhoid and closing the base of the incision with figure-eight penetrating sutures and designed this study protocol to evaluate its clinical efficacy and safety.

METHODS

A randomised single-blind parallel-controlled trial is proposed for this project, and patients who meet the inclusion criteria will be divided into a test group and a control group, with 39 patients in each group. The experimental group will be treated with modified ultrasonic scalpel haemorrhoidectomy, and the control group will be treated with the Milligan-Morgan operation. The effectiveness of modified ultrasonic scalpel haemorrhoidectomy for haemorrhoids will be objectively evaluated, including the incision healing time and the time for patients to return to normal activities, postoperative complications, evaluations of anal function 3 months and 6 months after surgery, an evaluation of quality of life 6 months after surgery, and an evaluation of the patient satisfaction rate 6 months after surgery. The safety assessment will consider all adverse and serious adverse events associated with the study treatment.

DISCUSSION

The study was approved by the ethics committee. The first patient was registered on July 1 2021. The purpose of this trial will be to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of the modified ultrasonic scalpel haemorrhoidectomy procedure for the treatment of mixed haemorrhoids and to provide an evidence base for the clinical promotion and application of the procedure. A limitation of this study is that only the patients will be single-blinded because the researchers and the patients cannot be blinded at the same time, which may produce certain bias in the results. In addition, the sample size of this study will be small, and the test results will only represent the findings from this clinical trial. In later stages, the sample size needs to be further expanded to improve the level of evidence. Despite its limitations, we hope the present study will help provide a more optimised surgical approach in the selection of haemorrhoid surgery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (Registration ID: ChiCTR2100047229). Registered on June 11, 2021.

ENSEAL® Hemorrhoidectomy, a Novel Technique, Versus Conventional Open Method for the Management of Grade III and IV Hemorrhoids

Background

Surgical removal of hemorrhoids is the gold-standard treatment for symptomatic grade III and IV hemorrhoid disease. There are numerous ways the hemorrhoidectomy surgical procedure is done but the most effective and least painful way is still to be elucidated.

Objective

To compare the outcomes of ENSEAL® (Ethicon, Inc., Raritan, USA) versus gold standard Milligan-Morgan hemorrhoidectomy in patients presenting with grade-III and IV hemorrhoids

Materials and methods

After ethical approval, the Randomized Controlled Trial was conducted at the Department of Surgery, Unit III, Lahore General Hospital, Lahore, Pakistan, between January 2020 and January 2022. In this study, 140 patients who met the inclusion criteria were recruited after informed consent. Patients were split randomly into two equal groups using a lottery technique. In group A, hemorrhoidectomy was carried out with ENSEAL®, whereas in group B, open hemorrhoidectomy was performed by the Milligan-Morgan method. the surgery duration and blood loss were noted. After the operation, patients were transferred to and discharged from the post-anesthesia recovery room. Patients were further followed up for pain scores after 24 hours. Data was analyzed by using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) v25 (IBM Corp., Armonk, USA). Data was categorized for age, gender, body mass index (BMI), degree of hemorrhoids, and duration of hemorrhoids. A p-value <0.05 was considered significant.

Results

140 patients were included in this study. Group A patients underwent ENSEAL® hemorrhoidectomy, and group B was formed from those who underwent the Milligan-Morgan procedure. In group A, there were 41 (58.5%) males and 29 (41.4%) females, while in group B, there were 43 (61.4%) males and 27 (38.5%) females. The mean age of group A patients was 49.97 ± 7.36 years and 43.2 ± 8.01 years in group B. In group A, the mean operative time was 20.87 ± 3.05 min, while 27.10 ± 3.42 min in group B, which is statistically significant with a p-value of <0.001. In group A, mean blood loss was 9.79 ± 2.87 ml, while 13.36 ± 3.73 ml in group B, which is statistically significant with a p-value of <0.001. In group A, the mean pain score was 2.7 ± 1.08, while 3.34 ± 1.16 in group B, which is statistically significant with a p-value of <0.001.

Conclusion

When considering the length of the procedure and blood loss, ENSEAL® hemorrhoidectomy has been determined to be an effective treatment that the patients tolerated well. Therefore, ENSEAL® hemorrhoidectomy can be a safe and efficient alternative to conventional treatment for hemorrhoids that are causing symptoms.

Ligasure™ Hemorrhoidectomy versus Conventional Hemorrhoidectomy: Comparison in Outcome

BACKGROUND: Hemorrhoids are a common problem faced in the surgical practice that cause a variety of symptoms ranging from bleeding per rectum to prolapsed, non-reducible and painful anal masses. Therefore, hemorrhoidectomy is one of most frequently performed surgical procedures worldwide. AIM: In this study, we will compare between the conventional surgical method and between LigaSure™ hemorrhoidectomy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: All 120 patients underwent hemorrhoidectomy by conventional and LigaSure™ method between September 2015 and September 2018 in Al-Kafeel hospital in Karbala city in Iraq. All cases underwent surgery by the three authors under regional anesthesia or general anesthesia by anesthetic team. A thorough history taking and physical examination were done and an informed consent has been taken from each patient before the surgery. Conventional hemorrhoidectomy was done for 50 patients randomly selected. The operation was done in the open method (Milligan Morgan’s). LigaSure™ hemorrhoidectomy was done for 70 patients randomly selected as well. Quantification of intra-operative bleeding was done by counting the number of gauzes. Patients were evaluated 5 days and a month and 3 months after the operation for complications and improvement of symptoms. The data were analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Sciences version 22.0. RESULTS: There were significant differences regarding the operation time, number of gauzes soaked with blood, hospital stay, pain score, post-operative bleeding, wound infection, residual mass, fecal incontinence and anal stenosis in favor of the LigaSure™ method. There was no significant difference regarding urine retention and post-operative discharge between the two methods. CONCLUSION: LigaSure™ hemorrhoidectomy can be a good alternative to conventional methods to reduce pain and make a more rapid recovery after hemorrhoidal surgery.

An update on surgical treatment of hemorrhoidal disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Pathologic hemorrhoids are common among adults age 45-65. Hemorrhoids are characterized as internal or external, and grades 1-4 based on severity. The type and grade dictate treatment, with surgical treatment reserved for grades 3/4. The aim of this study is to compare clinical outcomes of various surgical treatments.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted to identify randomized clinical trials that compare surgical treatments for grade 3/4 hemorrhoids. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was done using NetMetaXL and WinBUGS.

RESULTS

A total of 26 studies with 3137 participants and 14 surgical treatments for grade 3/4 hemorrhoids were included. Pain was less in patients with techniques such as laser (OR 0.34, CI 0.01-6.51), infrared photocoagulation (OR 0.38, CI 0.02-5.61), and stapling (OR 0.48, CI 0.19-1.25), compared to open and closed hemorrhoidectomies. There was less recurrence with Starion (OR 0.01, CI 0.00-0.46) and harmonic scalpel (OR 0.00, CI 0.00-0.49), compared to infrared photocoagulation and transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization. Fewer postoperative clinical complications were seen with infrared photocoagulation (OR 0.04, CI 0.00-2.54) and LigaSure (OR 0.16, CI 0.03-0.79), compared to suture ligation and open hemorrhoidectomy. With Doppler-guided (OR 0.26, CI 0.05-1.51) and stapled (OR 0.36, CI 0.15-0.84) techniques, patients return to work earlier when compared to open hemorrhoidectomy and laser.

CONCLUSION

There are multiple favorable techniques without a clear "gold standard" based on current literature. Open discussion should be had between patients and physicians to guide individualized care.

LigaSure small jaw versus conventional neck dissection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Neck dissection has a central role in the management of head and neck cancers. This systematic review aimed to compare the intraoperative and postoperative parameters between conventional and LigaSure Small Jaw (LSJ)-assisted neck dissection.

Methods

PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched.

independently by two authors for relevant articles comparing the outcomes of conventional and LSJ-assisted neck dissection. Data from each study were extracted, and a random-effects model was used in the pooled analysis.

Results

Compared with conventional techniques, LSJ-assisted neck dissection was associated with a significantly reduced operative time. The rates of postoperative hematoma, infection, amount of intraoperative blood loss, the length of hospital stay and the drainage amount showed no significant intergroup differences.

Conclusions

The meta-analysis provides evidence that properly using LSJ may reduce the operative time compared with that of conventional techniques. Surgeons may consider using LSJ in neck dissection according to personal experiences.

Graphical abstract

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40463-021-00504-2.

Analysis of the main surgical techniques for hemorrhoids

Introduction Surgical treatment of hemorrhoidal disease is used in about 5–10% of cases where conservative treatments have not been effective.

Objective To learn the surgical techniques used in the treatment of hemorrhoidal disease grades III and IV in the light of literature.

Methods This is an exploratory study, with an integrative review of literature published from 2009 to 2015 from databases LILACS, SciELO, MEDLINE, PUBMED and the Portal of CAPES, using the following descriptors: “hemorrhoidectomy” and “hemorrhoids”, in the period from March to May 2015.

Results Nineteen articles were selected. In the four more described techniques, the surgical time ranged from 19.58 to 52 min, with relapses from 5%, from 17.5 to 35 min and recurrences of 7.5% to 8.2%, 23–35 min was 20% and 22.5% relapse, 12.5 and 13.2 min, 3.5% of relapses.

Conclusion Conventional techniques are still the most commonly performed with a good acceptance on the long-term resolution and low recurrence rate.

Evaluation of Mucopexy-Recto Anal Lifting (MuRAL): A New Method for Treating Hemorrhoids

Objectives:

Ligation and excision remain the commonly recognized standard surgical modality for treating hemorrhoids. Further, impediments to surgical treatment owing to social factors and the need for minimally invasive procedures and other confounders have resulted in the adoption of the mucopexy-recto anal lifting (MuRAL) method which is associated with favorable outcomes. The objective of this study was to describe the procedure and report the outcomes in patients who underwent MuRAL.

Methods:

Between March 2016 and February 2018, 55 patients (26 males and 29 females) underwent MuRAL for hemorrhoids and rectal mucosal prolapse. The duration of the surgical procedure and hospitalization, postoperative complications, and satisfaction were evaluated.

Results:

The mean age of the male patients (n = 26) was 61.5 ± 4.9 years and that of the female patients (n = 29) was 61.5 ± 3.2 years. The mean duration of surgery was 46 ± 23 minutes for males and 53 ± 28 minutes for females, and the mean observation duration was 317 ± 186 days. Intraoperative hemorrhage was low for males and females. The mean hospitalization period was 3.2 ± 1.5 days for males and 4.3 ± 2.1 days for females. Differences in several postoperative complications were observed between male and female patients. Postoperative satisfaction was rated high by the patients.

Conclusions:

Risks of hemorrhage and pain associated with the MuRAL method were low because the procedure does not involve incision or excision. Other than ligation and excision, recurrence is favorable compared with that of other surgical modalities for the treatment of hemorrhoids.

Evaluation of the efficacy of topical sucralfate on healing haemorrhoidectomy incision wounds and reducing pain severity: A randomised clinical trial

The healing of haemorrhoidectomy wounds is a main concern of surgeons and patients. Various modalities can improve the quality of wound care after surgery. Antibiotics and topical agents, such as solutions and ointments, have been evaluated. The current research investigates the effects of sucralfate ointment on wound healing (epithelialisation) and postoperative pain after open haemorrhoidectomy. This trial involves two groups of randomly collected patients (n = 40) who underwent open haemorrhoidectomy surgery by the Milligan-Morgan method. A 10% topical sucralfate ointment was applied to the investigated group's wounds, while the control group patients used Vaseline as a placebo. The present work measured the two outcomes as follows: pain severity by a Visual Analogues Scale (VAS) score and epithelialisation by a surgeon's visual inspection. During the postoperative phase, the mean VAS was 3.70 for the investigated group and 6.90 for the control group. On the average, the completion of epithelialisation for the investigated group was on day 13 as opposed to day 20 for the control group. The topical application of sucralfate ointment on post-haemorrhoidectomy wound is an effective method for the promotion of healing, also lessens the severity of pain, and reduces the need for analgesics.

Risk of delayed bleeding after hemorrhoidectomy

PURPOSE

Delayed post-hemorrhoidectomy bleeding (DPHB) is a rare but serious complication. We investigated the incidence and risk factors of DPHB in patients undergoing hemorrhoidectomy using the LigaSure device or the Ferguson procedure.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 382 consecutive patients with symptomatic grades II to IV hemorrhoids who received either LigaSure (184 patients) or Ferguson (198 patients) hemorrhoidectomy procedures. Thirty-two patients who experienced DPHB after discharge were followed up.

RESULTS

Significantly fewer Ferguson group patients had DPHB compared to the LigaSure group (5.1% vs. 11.9%; P = 0.015). In the overall population, the risk of DPHB was higher in (1) males compared to that of females (OR = 3.39; 95% CI 1.50-7.69, P = 0.003); (2) in the LigaSure group compared to the Ferguson group (OR = 2.77; 95% CI 1.23-6.24, P = 0.01); and (3) in patients with constipation (OR = 6.59; 95% CI 2.73-15.89, P < 0.0001). Males in the LigaSure group had a significantly higher rate of delayed bleeding than those in the Ferguson group (20% vs. 5.8%, P = 0.004); no significant differences were found in females (4.9% vs. 4.5%, P = 0.878). Subgroup analysis showed that in males, risk of DPHB increased significantly with postoperative constipation (OR = 4.73, 95% CI 1.45-15.43, P = 0.010) and the LigaSure procedure (OR = 3.99, 95% CI 1.37-11.62, P = 0.011). In females, the risk of DPHB was significantly associated with postoperative constipation (OR = 8.80, 95% CI 2.24-34.54, P = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

The LigaSure procedure and constipation are independent risk factors for DPHB in patients undergoing hemorrhoidectomy and can be used as predictors of outcome.

Sebacoyl Dinalbuphine Ester Extended-release Injection for Long-acting Analgesia: A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, And Placebo-controlled Study in Hemorrhoidectomy Patients

OBJECTIVES

This study was conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of single sebacoyl dinalbuphine ester (SDE) injection (150 mg/2 mL) when administered intramuscularly to patients who underwent hemorrhoidectomy for postoperative long-acting analgesia.

METHODS

A total of 221 patients scheduled for hemorrhoidectomy from 6 centers in Taiwan were randomly divided into SDE group and placebo group, and received the treatment, vehicle or SDE, 1 day before the surgery. Visual analogue scale (VAS) was recorded up to 7 to 10 days. Pain intensity using VAS AUC through 48 hours after surgery was calculated as the primary efficacy endpoint.

RESULTS

Area under the curve of VAS pain intensity scores (VAS AUC) through 48 hours after hemorrhoidectomy was significantly less in SDE group than those in placebo group (209.93 vs. 253.53). VAS AUC from the end of surgical procedure to day 7 was also significantly different between SDE and placebo group (630.79 vs. 749.94). SDE group consumed significantly less amount of other analgesics, such as PCA ketorolac and oral ketorolac. Median time from the end of surgery to the first use of pain relief medication was also shortened in the placebo group than in the SDE group. Most adverse events were assessed as mild and tolerable in both groups.

DISCUSSION

SDE injection demonstrated an extended analgesia effect, with a statistically significant reduction in pain intensity through 48 hours and 7 days after hemorrhoidectomy.

Comparison of the reliability and efficacy of LigaSure hemorrhoidectomy and a conventional Milligan-Morgan hemorrhoidectomy in the surgical treatment of grade 3 and 4 hemorrhoids

Objective

The aim of this study was to compare the clinical results of LigaSure-assisted hemorrhoidectomy and Milligan-Morgan hemorrhoidectomy as a conventional method in our clinic.

Materials and Methods

Patients who underwent LigaSure-assisted hemorrhoidectomy or conventional hemorrhoidectomy for grade 3 and 4 hemorrhoids in our clinic between 2009 and 2014 were included in this study. The patient data were reviewed by screening records. Gender, age, preoperative hemoglobin and hematocrit levels, operation time, presence of thrombosis, number of packages, hospitalization time, early and late postoperative complications, prolonged pain presence, and follow-up period were recorded.

Results

In this period, surgical interventions were performed on 365 patients diagnosed with hemorrhoids. Among these, 159 underwent LigaSure-assisted operations, while 206 were operated on by conventional methods. One hundred forty-four (39.5%) cases were female, while 221 (60.5%) cases were male. The median age of the patients was 40 (19-82) years in the LigaSure group and 41 (16-78) years in the conventional method group. The operation time was 15 (4-60) min in the LigaSure group and 20 (6-40) min in the conventional method group. Postoperative analgesics were given to the 182 (88.3%) cases in the conventional group and 107 (67.3%) cases in the LigaSure group. The time required for returning to normal daily activity was 6 (1-15) days in the LigaSure group and 7 (1-30) days in the conventional method group.

Conclusion

In this study, LigaSure was determined to be superior to a conventional method in terms of operation time, hospitalization period, postoperative analgesic requirements, time required for returning to normal daily activity, and postoperative bleeding.

Efficacy of metronidazole versus placebo in pain control after hemorrhoidectomy. Results of a controlled clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

Hemorrhoidal disease occurs in 50% of people aged > 40 years and is the most common reason for anorectal surgery. Pain is the main complication. Multiple topical and systemic drugs have been investigated for pain control, but there is no ideal treatment. Metronidazole has been shown to decrease postoperative pain but is not used widely.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of oral metronidazole versus placebo and to assess postoperative pain following hemorrhoidectomy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Controlled clinical trial in adult patients who underwent elective hemorrhoidectomy for grade III/IV hemorrhoids. Patients were assigned to receive metronidazole (500 mg q8 h orally; study group, SG) or placebo (control group, CG) for 7 days after surgery. Pain was assessed using a visual analog scale after surgery. Analgesic administration (time and use of analgesics) and resumption of daily life activities were also assessed.

RESULTS

Forty-four patients were included, 22 in each group. Postoperative pain differed significantly between the SG and CG at 6 h (3.86 ± 0.56, 6.64 ± 1.49), 12 h (5.59 ± 1.33, 8.82 ± 0.79), 24 h (6.86 ± 1.49, 9.73 ± 0.45), day 4 (5.32 ± 2.10, 9.50 ± 0.59), day 7 (3.14 ± 1.03, 7.36 ± 1.39), and day 14 (2.14 ± 0.46, 5.45 ± 1.29). The first analgesia dose was required at 21.27 ± 5.47 h in the CG and 7.09 ± 2.36 h in the SG (p < 0.05), the time of analgesic use was 6.86 ± 1.61 days in the CG and 13.09 ± 2.48 days in the SG (p < 0.05), and resumption of daily activities occurred at 7.59 ± 1.56 days in the CG and 14.73 ± 3.76 days in the SG (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Oral administration of metronidazole is effective in pain management after hemorrhoidectomy.

Comparison of hemorrhoidectomy by LigaSure with conventional Milligan Morgan's hemorrhoidectomy

Objective:

To compare the efficacy of haemorrhoidectomy done by using LigaSure with conventional Milligan Morgan haemorrhoidectomy.

Methods:

This randomized controlled trial was done at Department of Surgery Dow University Hospital Karachi during January 2013 to September 2015. A total of 55 patients were included in the study. Patients were randomly allocated to group A (Haemorrhoidectomy by Ligasure) and group B (Milligan Morgan Haemorrhoiectomy). Efficacies of both procedures were compared by operative time, Blood loss, wound healing, and pain score on immediate, 1st and 7^th post operative day.

Results:

Out of total 55 patients 23 were male and 32 were females. The most common group of age involved was between 40 – 60 years. Third degree Heamorrhoids were present in 37 (67.3%) of patients while remaining 18 (32.7%) had fourth degree Heamorrhoids. Group A included 29 cases while Group B included 26 cases. The mean operating time of Group A was 52.5 with standard deviation of 11.9 while it was 36.6± 9.8 in the other group. The mean blood loss in group A was 51.92 with standard deviation of 15.68 while it was 70.34±25.59 in group B. Overall pain score was less in those patients who underwent Heamorrhoidectomy by Ligasure method.

Conclusion:

The efficacy of Heamorrhoidectomy by Ligasure is better than the traditional Milligan Morgan Heamorrhoidectomy but we need more clinical trials with large sample size and long term follow ups.

Systematic review and network meta-analysis comparing clinical outcomes and effectiveness of surgical treatments for haemorrhoids

BACKGROUND

The aim was to compare the clinical outcomes and effectiveness of surgical treatments for haemorrhoids.

METHODS

Randomized clinical trials were identified by means of a systematic review. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed using the Markov chain Monte Carlo method in WinBUGS.

RESULTS

Ninety-eight trials were included with 7827 participants and 11 surgical treatments for grade III and IV haemorrhoids. Open, closed and radiofrequency haemorrhoidectomies resulted in significantly more postoperative complications than transanal haemorrhoidal dearterialization (THD), LigaSure™ and Harmonic® haemorrhoidectomies. THD had significantly less postoperative bleeding than open and stapled procedures, and resulted in significantly fewer emergency reoperations than open, closed, stapled and LigaSure™ haemorrhoidectomies. Open and closed haemorrhoidectomies resulted in more pain on postoperative day 1 than stapled, THD, LigaSure™ and Harmonic® procedures. After stapled, LigaSure™ and Harmonic® haemorrhoidectomies patients resumed normal daily activities earlier than after open and closed procedures. THD provided the earliest time to first bowel movement. The stapled and THD groups had significantly higher haemorrhoid recurrence rates than the open, closed and LigaSure™ groups. Recurrence of haemorrhoidal symptoms was more common after stapled haemorrhoidectomy than after open and LigaSure™ operations. No significant difference was identified between treatments for anal stenosis, incontinence and perianal skin tags.

CONCLUSION

Open and closed haemorrhoidectomies resulted in more postoperative complications and slower recovery, but fewer haemorrhoid recurrences. THD and stapled haemorrhoidectomies were associated with decreased postoperative pain and faster recovery, but higher recurrence rates. The advantages and disadvantages of each surgical treatment should be discussed with the patient before surgery to allow an informed decision to be made.

Vascular Z-shaped ligation technique in surgical treatment of haemorrhoid

AIM

To present the effectiveness of minimal invasive vascular zet ligation in the surgical treatment of haemorrhoidal disease (HD).

METHODS

Among 138 patients with 2(nd)-4(th) grade internal HD having several complaints and operated at our hospital between 2003-2013; 116 patients who regularly attended 1-year control were included in the study. Operation times, postoperative early period pain, satisfaction score, complications and relapse details were obtained from computer records retrospectively. Visual Analogous Scale (VAS) scores were used for patient satisfaction on the 3(rd), 7(th) and 21(st) days. Technique; fixed suture which is constituted by the first leg of the Z-shaped suture (to pass by the mucosa and muscular layer) was put in the pile root in order to ensure vascular ligation and fixation. The second leg of the Z-shaped suture is constituted by mobile suture and it passes by the pile mucosa and submucosa which prolapses 5-10 mm below the first suture.

RESULTS

Seventy-five of the patients (65%) were male, 41 of them (35%) were female and their age average was 41. The mean operation time was 12 ± 4.8 min. VAS/satisfaction score was found as 2.2/4.3, 1.8/4.0, 1.2/4.4 respectively on the 3(rd), 7(th), and 21(st) days. Four of the patient (3.5%) had relapse.

CONCLUSION

This technique is an easily applicable, cost efficient way of operation which increases patient satisfaction.