Radiofrequency ablation and plication--a new technique for prolapsing hemorrhoidal disease

Bio-thermal response during laser haemorrhoidoplasty: an exclusive analytical and numerical approach for theoretical investigation

Haemorrhoidal disease is identified by declension of the inflamed and bleeding of vascular tissues of the anal canal. Traditionally, haemorrhoids are associated with chronic constipation and the most common symptoms are irritation in anus region, pain and discomfort, swelling around anus, tender lumps around the anus and rectal bleeding (depending upon the grade of haemorrhoid). Among the several conventional treatment procedures (commonly mentioned as, rubber band litigation, sclerotherapy and electrotherapy), laser haemorrhoidoplasty is an out-patient and less-invasive laparoscopic procedure. From literature survey it has been observed that an exclusive theoretical model depicting the impact of 1064 nm wavelength laser wave on living tissues subjected to haemorrhoid therapy is not available. This research work is a pioneering attempt to develop a theoretical study attributing specifically on laser therapy of haemorrhoid treatment based on Pennes' biological heat transfer model. The corresponding mathematical model has been solved by analytical method to establish thermal response of tissue during the treatment and also the same has been solved a numerical approach based on finite difference method to validate the feasibility of former method due to unavailability of any theoretical model. Impact of variation of blood perfusion term, laser pulse time and optical penetration depth on temperature response of skin tissue is captured. The tissue temperature decreases along with time of laser exposure with increasing the blood perfusion rate as it carries away large amount of heat. With the increase in laser pulse time, tissue temperature declines due to shorter pulse time resulting in higher energy consumed by electrons. The research outcome is successfully validated with less than 1% of error observed between the appointed analytical and numerical scheme.

The role of the Rafaelo procedure in the management of hemorrhoidal disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to summarize the current evidence regarding the role of the Rafaelo procedure in the management of hemorrhoidal disease (HD).

METHODS

This study was based on the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A literature search was performed (Medline, Scopus, CENTRAL, and Web of Science) from inception to 25/09/2022. Grey literature databases were also reviewed. The primary endpoint was the pooled complications rate of the Rafaelo procedure in patients with HD. Secondary endpoints included short- (bleeding, pain, thrombosis, necrosis, urinary retention, fever, oedema, anal fissure, and readmission) and long-term (stenosis, meteorism, constipation, anal tags, anal hyposensibility, reoperation, and recurrence) postoperative complication rates. Both prospective and retrospective studies were considered. Quality evaluation was performed via the ROBINS-I tool. Certainty of Evidence was based on the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology.

RESULTS

Overall, 6 non-randomized studies and 327 patients were included. The overall complication rate was 17.6% (95% CI 8.8-26.3%). Short-term complications were bleeding (7.5%, 95% CI 2.5-12.5%), thrombosis (2.2%, 95% CI 0.4-4.8%), and pain (1.6%, 95% CI 0.2-3.3%). Reoperation and recurrence rates were 1.8% (95% CI 0.3-3.4%) and 4.8% (95% CI 1.2-8.4%), respectively. A significant improvement in the presenting symptoms was noted. Method approval and patient satisfaction rates were 89.1% (95% CI 81.7-96.6%) and 95% (95% CI 89.8-100%), correspondingly. Overall CoE was "Very Low".

CONCLUSIONS

Further randomized controlled trials are required to delineate the exact role of the Rafaelo procedure in HD.

Still a Case of "No Pain, No Gain"? An Updated and Critical Review of the Pathogenesis, Diagnosis, and Management Options for Hemorrhoids in 2020

The treatment of haemorrhoids remains challenging: multiple treatment options supported by heterogeneous evidence are available, but patients rightly demand a tailored approach. Evidence for newer surgical techniques that promise to be less painful has been conflicting. We review the current evidence for management options in patients who present with varying haemorrhoidal grades. A review of the English literature was performed utilizing MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases (31 May 2019). The search terms (haemorrhoid OR haemorrhoid OR haemorrhoids OR haemorrhoids OR "Hemorrhoid"[Mesh]) were used. First- and second-degree haemorrhoids continue to be managed conservatively. The easily repeatable and cost-efficient rubber band ligation is the preferred method to address minor haemorrhoids; long-term outcomes following injection sclerotherapy remain poor. Conventional haemorrhoidectomies (Ferguson/Milligan-Morgan/Ligasure haemorrhoidectomy) still have their role in third- and fourth-degree haemorrhoids, being associated with lowest recurrence; nevertheless, posthaemorrhoidectomy pain is problematic. Stapled haemorrhoidopexy allows quicker recovery, albeit at the costs of higher recurrence rates and potentially serious complications. Transanal Haemorrhoidal Dearterialization has been promoted as nonexcisional and less invasive, but the recent HubBLe trial has questioned its overall place in haemorrhoid management. Novel "walk-in-walk-out" techniques such as radiofrequency ablations or laser treatments will need further evaluation to define their role in modern-day haemorrhoid management. There are numerous treatment options for haemorrhoids, each with their own evidence-base. Newer techniques promise to be less painful, but recurrence rates remain an issue. The balance continues to be sought between long-term efficacy, minimisation of postoperative pain, and preservation of anorectal function.