Diathermy excisional hemorrhoidectomy: a prospective randomized study comparing pedicle ligation and pedicle coagulation

Post-hemorrhoidectomy pain: can surgeons reduce it? A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized trials

PURPOSE

Hemorrhoidectomy remains the gold standard treatment for grade III-IV hemorrhoids. However, despite strong recommendations for the suitability of outpatient surgery, post-operative pain has been a limitation to the widespread inclusion of this condition in day surgery programs. The aims of the study were to analyze and compare the post-operative pain of conventional open hemorrhoidectomy, considered the reference technique, against other surgical procedures such as closed hemorrhoidectomy, open hemorrhoidectomy using bipolar or ultrasonic sealant, hemorrhoidopexy, or HAL-RAR, when performed exclusively as outpatients.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted according to PRISMA methodology. All prospective and randomized studies of patients operated on for hemorrhoids in day surgery and specifying the value of post-operative pain, using a validated scale, were included. Conventional meta-analyses and a random-effects network meta-analysis were carried out.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine studies were included (3309 patients). None of the procedures described severe pain in the post-operative period. Hemorrhoidopexy was the least painful. Conventional open hemorrhoidectomy was the most painful on the first and seventh post-operative days. Pain was reduced after closed hemorrhoidectomy technique and when bipolar or harmonic scalpel was used. Furthermore, transfixive ligation of the hemorrhoidal pedicle was associated with increased post-operative pain.

CONCLUSION

Hemorrhoidal surgery is feasible in day surgery units and post-operative pain can be adequately managed in an outpatient setting. Hemorrhoidopexy was the least painful; however, data should be carefully evaluated by the high rate of long-term recurrence described in literature. Closed hemorrhoidectomy, performed with bipolar or ultrasonic sealing, avoiding transfixive ligation of the hemorrhoidal pedicle, may improve post-operative pain control.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

CRD42020185160.

Short-Term Outcomes of Polycarbophil and Propionibacterium acnes Lysate Gel after Open Hemorrhoidectomy: A Prospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Pain is the most common complication after open excisional hemorrhoidectomy (OEH). We assessed the effectiveness of polycarbophil and Propionibacterium acnes lysate gel (Emorsan®Gel) on pain control after OEH.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Fifty consecutive patients undergoing OEH were included. All patients received stool softeners and oral analgesia in the post-operative period. Emorsan®Gel was also used topically by the last 25 patients (Emorsan®Gel group (EG)) until Post-Operative Day 20 (POD 20). The primary outcome was the effectiveness of Emorsan®Gel on pain relief using an 11-point visual analogue scale (VAS). Morbidity, wound healing (WH), and time to work were documented at POD 1, POD 10, POD 20, and POD 40.

RESULTS

Of the 50 patients enrolled, twenty-eight (56%) were males; median age, 49 (range, 28-73) years. The VAS score decreased over time in all patients, with significantly lower scores at POD 20 in the EG (1.44 (SD, 1.16) vs. 2.12 (0.93) in the control group (CG); p = 0.045). All patients in the EG achieved complete WH at last follow-up, compared to only 17 (68%) in the CG (p = 0.004). The likelihood of WH was 66% higher in the EG (OR, 1.66 [95%CI, 0.80-3.44; p = 0.172).

CONCLUSIONS

Emorsan®Gel is safe and effective at reducing pain after EOH, promoting earlier WH compared to standard care treatment.

Mesoglycan for pain control after open excisional HAEMOrrhoidectomy (MeHAEMO): an observational multicentre study on behalf of the Italian Society of Colorectal Surgery (SICCR)

BACKGROUND

Excisional haemorrhoidectomy is the gold standard technique in patients with III and IV degree haemorrhoidal disease (HD). However, it is associated with a significant rate of post-operative pain. The aim of our study was to evaluate the efficacy of mesoglycan in the post-operative period of patients who underwent open excisional diathermy haemorrhoidectomy (OEH).

METHODS

This was a retrospective multicentre observational study. Three hundred ninety-eight patients from sixteen colorectal referral centres who underwent OEH for III and IV HD were enrolled. All patients were followed-up on the first post-operative day (T1) and after 1 week (T2), 3 weeks (T3) and 6 weeks (T4). BMI, habits, SF-12 questionnaire, VAS at rest (VASs), after defecation (VASd), and after anorectal digital examination (VASe), bleeding and thrombosis, time to surgical wound healing and autonomy were evaluated.

RESULTS

In the mesoglycan group, post-operative thrombosis was significantly reduced at T2 (p < 0.05) and T3 (p < 0.005), and all patients experienced less post-operative pain at each time point (p < 0.001 except for VASe T4 p = 0.003). There were no significant differences between the two groups regarding the time to surgical wound healing or post-operative bleeding. There was an early recovery of autonomy in the mesoglycan group in all three follow-up periods (T2 p = 0.016; T3 p = 0.002; T4 p = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of mesoglycan led to a significant reduction in post-operative thrombosis and pain with consequent early resumption of autonomy. Trial registration NCT04481698-Mesoglycan for Pain Control After Open Excisional HAEMOrrhoidectomy (MeHAEMO) https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04481698?term=Mesoglycan+for+Pain+Control+After+Open+Excisional+HAEMOrrhoidectomy+%28MeHAEMO%29&draw=2&rank=1.

Minimal Open Hemorrhoidectomy Versus Transanal Hemorrhoidal Dearterialization: The Effect on Symptoms: An Open-Label Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

There is limited evidence on the long-term efficacy of transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization compared with hemorrhoidectomy. Most studies investigated short-term effects with postoperative pain as the primary outcome. Being a benign disease, the long-term goal of treatment for hemorrhoids is the resolution of symptoms and improvement of quality of life.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to compare the effect of minimal open hemorrhoidectomy versus transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization on patient-reported symptoms.

DESIGN

This was an open-label randomized controlled trial.

SETTINGS

This was a single-center study.

PATIENTS

Patients with symptomatic hemorrhoids grade II to IV (Goligher's classification) were included.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomly allocated to minimal open hemorrhoidectomy or transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was symptoms assessed by the Hemorrhoidal Disease Symptom Score 1 year postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included health-related quality of life, patient satisfaction, postoperative pain and recovery, adverse events, recurrence, and hospital costs.

RESULTS

Forty-eight patients received minimal open hemorrhoidectomy, and 50 patients received transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization. No difference in symptom score at 1-year follow-up was found. Median (range) symptom score was 3 (0-17) after minimal open hemorrhoidectomy and 5 (0-17) after transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization (median difference = -1.0 (95% CI, -3.0 to 0.0); p = 0.15). Residual hemorrhoidal prolapse was reported more frequently (p = 0.008), and more patients had treatment for recurrence after transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization (7 vs 0 patients; p = 0.013). Patient satisfaction was higher after minimal open hemorrhoidectomy (p = 0.049). No differences were found in the impact on health-related quality of life, average and peak postoperative pain, recovery, or adverse events (p > 0.05). Transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization was more expensive (median difference = &OV0556;555 (95% CI, &OV0556;472-&OV0556;693); p < 0.001).

LIMITATIONS

No blinding was included in this study.

CONCLUSION

No difference was found in symptom score 1 year postoperatively. Minimal open hemorrhoidectomy had a better effect on the hemorrhoidal prolapse and higher patient satisfaction. More patients needed treatment for recurrence after transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization. Minimal open hemorrhoidectomy has an immediate postoperative course similar to transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B152.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02061176. HEMORROIDECTOMíA MíNIMA ABIERTA VERSUS DESARTERIALIZACIóN HEMORROIDAL TRANSANAL: EL EFECTO SOBRE LOS SíNTOMAS: UN ESTUDIO ABIERTO CONTROLADO Y ALEATORIZADO: Hay evidencia limitada sobre la eficacia a largo plazo de la desarterialización hemorroidal transanal en comparación con la hemorroidectomía. La mayoría de los estudios han investigado los efectos a corto plazo con el dolor postoperatorio como el resultado primario. Al ser una enfermedad benigna, el objetivo a largo plazo del tratamiento de la enfermedad hemorroidal es la resolución de los síntomas y la mejora en la calidad de vida.Comparar el efecto de la hemorroidectomía abierta mínima versus la desarterialización hemorroidal transanal en los síntomas reportados por el paciente.Ensayo controlado aleatorizado abierto.Estudio en sede única.Pacientes con enfermedad hemorroidal sintomática de grado II-IV (clasificación de Goligher).Los pacientes fueron asignados aleatoriamente a hemorroidectomía mínima abierta o desarterialización hemorroidal transanal.El resultado primario fueron los síntomas evaluados por el Score de Síntomas de Enfermedad Hemorroidal un año después de la operación. Los resultados secundarios incluyeron calidad de vida relacionada con la salud, satisfacción del paciente, dolor y recuperación postoperatorios, eventos adversos, recurrencia y costos hospitalarios.Cuarenta y ocho pacientes recibieron hemorroidectomía abierta mínima y cincuenta pacientes recibieron desarterialización hemorroidal transanal. No se encontraron diferencias en la puntuación de los síntomas al año de seguimiento. La puntuación mediana (rango) de síntomas fue 3 (0-17) después de una hemorroidectomía mínima abierta y 5 (0-17) después de la desarterialización hemorroidal transanal (diferencia mediana [IC95%]: -1.0 [-3.0-0.0], p = 0.15). El prolapso hemorroidal residual se informó con mayor frecuencia (p = 0.008) y más pacientes recibieron tratamiento por recurrencia después de la desarterialización hemorroidal transanal (7 frente a 0 pacientes, p = 0.013). La satisfacción del paciente fue mayor después de una hemorroidectomía abierta mínima (p = 0.049). No se encontraron diferencias en el impacto sobre la calidad de vida relacionada con la salud, el dolor postoperatorio promedio y máximo, la recuperación o los eventos adversos (p> 0.05). La desarterialización hemorroidal transanal fue más costosa (diferencia mediana [IC95%]: &OV0556; 555 [472-693], p <0.001).Estudio sin cegamiento.No se encontraron diferencias en la puntuación de los síntomas a un año después de la operación. La hemorroidectomía mínima abierta tuvo un mejor efecto sobre el prolapso hemorroidal y una mayor satisfacción del paciente. Más pacientes necesitaron tratamiento para la recurrencia después de la desarterialización hemorroidal transanal. La hemorroidectomía abierta mínima tiene un curso postoperatorio inmediato similar a la desarterialización hemorroidal transanal. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B152. (Traducción-Dr. Jorge Silva Velazco).ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02061176.

Conservative and surgical treatment of haemorrhoids

The management of haemorrhoids has evolved rapidly during the past few decades. Several new treatments have been proposed with the aim of reducing patients' postoperative pain, time to return to normal life, risk of early and late complications, and recurrence rate. Although conservative treatment based on dietary and lifestyle changes can help the majority of patients, and rubber band ligation and phlebotonic drugs can effectively treat grade I and II haemorrhoids, surgery is required for the most advanced stages. Milligan-Morgan haemorrhoidectomy is considered to be the gold-standard approach for grade IV haemorrhoids. An increasing number of minimally invasive treatment options, including mucopexy with or without mucosal resection and haemorrhoid artery ligation, have now been proposed for the management of grade III haemorrhoids. These approaches aim to correct the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms involved in the aetiology of haemorrhoids. An increased risk of recurrence is the price to pay for these minimally invasive and less painful treatments, but the sparing of the sensitive anoderm and a rapid return to normal life without pain are greatly appreciated by patients. An algorithm for the management of haemorrhoids using evidence-based medicine is also presented here.