LigaSure hemorrhoidectomy versus stapled hemorrhoidopexy: a prospective, randomized clinical trial

LigaSure hemorrhoidectomy versus the procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

LigaSure hemorrhoidectomy and the procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids (PPH) are both relatively new treatments for managing symptomatic hemorrhoids. This review aimed to evaluate and compare their short-term outcomes.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and the China National Knowledge Infrastructure database for randomized controlled trials comparing the LigaSure procedure and PPH published in any language from 1998 to October 2013.

RESULTS

A total of 5 studies involving 397 participants were included in this review. Pooled analysis showed that the LigaSure procedure was associated with significantly lower recurrence rate [relative risk (RR) = 0.21, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.06 to 0.72, P = .01] and significantly shorter operating time [mean difference (MD) = -6.39, 95% CI: -7.68 to -5.10, P < .001]. The analysis showed no significant difference in postoperative pain between the two techniques (MD = 0.55, 95% CI: -0.15 to 1.25, P = .12] or in time off work or away from normal activity [standard MD = 0.13, 95% CI: -1.80 to 2.06, P = .9]. The two techniques did not show significant differences in postoperative complications or other patient-related outcomes (P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Our review indicates that both LigaSure hemorrhoidectomy and PPH are safe alternatives for the management of hemorrhoids. Available evidence suggests that the LigaSure technique is associated with shorter operating time and lower hemorrhoid recurrence rate, but these conclusions should be further confirmed in large, multicenter randomized controlled trials with long-term follow-up.

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.

Japanese Practice Guidelines for Anal Disorders I. Hemorrhoids

The pathogenesis of hemorrhoids is a weakening of the anal cushion and spasm of the internal sphincter. Bowel habits and lifestyles can be risk factors for hemorrhoids. The prevalence of hemorrhoids can encompass 4 to 55% of the population. Symptoms include bleeding, pain, prolapsing, swelling, itching, and mucus soiling. The diagnosis of hemorrhoids requires taking a thorough history and conducting an anorectal examination. Goligher's classification, which indicates the degree of prolapsing with internal hemorrhoids, is useful for choosing treatment. Drug therapy for hemorrhoids is typically utilized for bleeding, pain, and swelling. Ligation and excision (LE) is considered for Grade III and IV internal and external hemorrhoids. Rubber band ligation is used to treat up to Grade III internal hemorrhoids. Phenol almond oil is effective for internal hemorrhoids up to Grade III, while aluminum potassium sulfate and tannic acid have shown efficacy in treating prolapsing in internal hemorrhoids at Grades II, III, and IV. Procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids (PPH) is surgically effective for Grade III internal hemorrhoids; however, the long-term prognosis is not favorable, with high recurrence rates. Separating ligation is effective surgical treatment for internal/external hemorrhoids Grade III and Grade IV. The basic approach to thrombosed external hemorrhoids and incarcerated hemorrhoids is conservative treatment; however, in some acute or severe cases, surgical resection is considered. Comparing the different instruments used for hemorrhoid surgery, all reduce operating time, blood loss, post-operative pain, and length of time until the return to normal activity. They do, of course, increase the cost of the procedure.

Stapled Hemorrhoidopexy: Results at 10-Year Follow-up

BACKGROUND

Despite the advantages of stapled hemorrhoidopexy reported in the literature in terms of postoperative pain, hospital stay, and duration of convalescence, it was described to have a higher recurrence rate compared with conventional hemorrhoidectomy.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction after stapled hemorrhoidopexy at 10-year follow-up.

DESIGN

This was a retrospective cohort analysis conducted on prospectively collected data.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted at a single tertiary care center.

PATIENTS

Eighty-six consecutive patients treated with stapled hemorrhoidopexy for grade 3 hemorrhoidal prolapse between January and December 2006 were included.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Patients satisfaction and recurrence rates were measured.

RESULTS

Eighty-six patients (45 men and 41 women; median age, 49 y (range, 31-74 y)) underwent stapled hemorrhoidopexy. Eight patients had urinary retention during the immediate postoperative period, and 2 patients required a reoperation for suture line bleeding. The median hospital stay was 12 hours (range, 12-96 h). No suture line dehiscence, rectovaginal fistula, pelvic sepsis, anal abscess, or anal stenosis was recorded during the follow-up. Seventy-seven patients (90%) completed the expected follow-up, with a median duration of 119.0 months (range 115.4-121.8 mo). Among them, 30 patients (39%) experienced a recurrent hemorrhoidal prolapse, 8 of whom needed a reoperation. Thirty-four patients (44%) reported urge to defecate with a median visual analog scale of 1 (range, 1-7). Six patients (8%) reported gas leakage at the last follow-up visit, whereas no liquid or solid stool leakage was recorded. Satisfaction rate at 10-year follow-up was 68%.

LIMITATIONS

The study was limited by its small sample size and lack of a control group.

CONCLUSIONS

The high recurrence rate and low patient satisfaction rate showed that stapled hemorrhoidopexy reduces its efficacy in the long-term. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/A510.

Transanal hemorrhoid dearterialization is a safe and effective outpatient procedure for the treatment of hemorrhoidal disease

INTRODUCTION

This prospective, observational study evaluated transanal dearterialization (THD) efficacy and safety in grade 2-4 hemorrhoids (HD).

METHODS

THD was performed under sedation-locoregional anesthesia in 402 outpatients. Patients had follow-up evaluation 3 days, 2 weeks, 1, 6 and 12 months postoperatively. Postoperative complications and recurrence of symptoms at 12 months were analyzed. The relationship between the learning curve and the number of postoperative complications was studied.

RESULTS

Mean patient age was 46.4 (range 20-85) years. A total of 268 patients (66.6%) were male. Sixteen patients (4.0%) had grade 2 HD, 210 (52.2%) had grade 3 and 176 (43.8%) had grade 4 HD. Surgery lasted 23 (17-34) min. A total of 67 patients had complications: bleeding in 10 patients (2.5%), hemorrhoidal thromboses in 10 (2.5%), perianal fistulas in 5 (1.2%), fissures in 14 (3.5%), urinary retention in 3 (0.8%), residual prolapse in 19 (4.7%), severe anal pain in 3 (0.8%), and perianal abscess in 3 patients (0.8%). Recurrent HD occurred in 6.3% (1/16) of grade 2 HD patients, 5.8% (12/210) of grade 3 patients and 9.7% (17/176) of grade 4 patients. Twelve months after THD, bleeding was controlled in 363 patients (90.5%), prolapse was controlled in 391 (97.3%) and pain markedly improved in 390 patients (97%).

CONCLUSION

THD appears safe and effective for grade 2-4 HD, and the number of complications decreased with increasing surgeon experience. THD advantages include mild pain, fast recovery, early return to daily activities and low incidence of complications.

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.

Ligasure versus stapled hemorrhoidectomy in the treatment of hemorrhoids: a meta-analysis of randomized control trials

The aim of this meta-analysis was to compare the outcomes of Ligasure hemorrhoidectomy and stapled hemorrhoidectomy for prolapsed hemorrhoids. Original studies in any language were searched from MEDLINE database, PubMed, Web of science and the Cochrane Library database, and Wangfang database. Randomized control trials that compared Ligasure hemorrhoidectomy with stapled hemorrhoidectomy were identified. Data were extracted independently for each study, and a meta-analysis was performed using fixed and random-effects models. Five trials including 397 patients met the inclusion criteria. Patients treated with Ligasure had a significantly shorter operative time compared with patients who underwent stapler techniques. The recurrence rate was higher in patients who underwent stapled hemorrhoidectomy. No statistically significant differences were observed in postoperative bleeding, urinary retention, difficult defecating, anal fissure, anal stenosis, incontinence, postoperative pain, return to normal activities, and hospital stay. Our meta-analysis shows that Ligasure is an effective instrument for hemorrhoidectomy, which results in shorter operation time and lower recurrence rate.

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.

Recent advances in the management of hemorrhoids

Hemorrhoids are considered one of the most common anorectal diseases with a prevalence of 4.4% up to 36.4% of the general population, and a peak incidence between 45 and 65 years. Hemorrhoidal disease presents with a prolapsed lump, painless bleeding, discomfort, discharge, hygiene problems, soiling, and pruritus. Sliding anal canal lining theory is the most accepted theory as a cause of hemorrhoidal disease; however, it is also associated with hyper-vascularity, and, recently, with several enzymes or mediators involved in the disintegration of the tissues supporting the anal cushions, such as matrix metalloproteinase. A comprehensive search in published English-language literature till 2013 involving hemorrhoids was performed to construct this review article, which discusses advances in the management of hemorrhoids. This includes conservative treatment (life style modification, oral medications, and topical treatment), office procedures (rubber band ligation, injection sclerotherapy, infrared and radiofrequency coagulation, bipolar diathermy and direct-current electrotherapy, cryosurgery, and laser therapy), as well as surgical procedures including diathermy hemorrhoidectomy, LigaSure hemorrhoidectomy, Harmonic scalpel hemorrhoidectomy, hemorrhoidal artery ligation, stapled hemorrhoidopexy (SH), and double SH. Results, merits and demerits of the different modalities of treatment of hemorrhoids are presented, in addition to the cost of the recent innovations.

Development and validation of a practical score to predict pain after excisional hemorrhoidectomy

PURPOSE

Excisional hemorrhoidectomy (EH) can be complicated by high early (EP) and prolonged pain (PP). This study aimed to determine predictors of high postoperative pain and to develop a risk score suitable to identify patient candidates to a more active analgesic treatment.

METHODS

We collected data of patients undergoing EH between January 2005 and September 2012 (development group). Patient-, disease-, surgery-, and surgeon-related characteristics were gathered. Anxiety was evaluated by means of STAI-Y. EP was assessed at 1-day, while PP at 15-day follow-up by means of a 10-cm VAS (cutoff, EP ≥ 5; PP ≥ 3 cm). On the basis of the odds ratio from a logistic regression, independent risk factors were assigned a weighted integer. The sum comprised the risk score, which was validated on a prospective cohort of patients undergoing EH between September 2012 and January 2014.

RESULTS

Five hundred fourteen patients were included in development group. Incidence of EP was 18.3 %, with 40.4 % developing PP. Younger age, male gender, advanced education, constipation, external component, anxious state and trait, and high anal resting tone were independent predictors of EP. Previous pain exerted a protective effect. Incomplete postoperative evacuation, advanced education level, high anal resting tone, and anxious trait were predictors of PP. In the development group, the risk of EP ranged between 1 % (low risk) and 21 % (high risk). Receiver operating curve (ROC) analysis of validation group (n = 130) confirmed the discriminatory power of this model (area under the ROC = 0.69).

CONCLUSION

The score can stratify the risk of EP following EH, identifying high-risk patient candidates to active analgesic administration or alternative surgical procedures.

Circular vs. three-quadrant hemorrhoidectomy for end-stage hemorrhoids: short- and long-term outcomes of a prospective randomized trial

PURPOSE

Circumferential excisional hemorrhoidectomy (CEH) enables the surgeon to remove the encircling hemorrhoids completely. The purpose of this study is to compare the efficacy of CEH with that of Ferguson hemorrhoidectomy (FH) for end-stage hemorrhoids.

METHODS

Between February 1998 and December 2011, a prospective randomized trial was conducted with 688 patients who presented with end-stage hemorrhoids and underwent FH or CEH at our center.

RESULTS

The patient demographics, mean operative times, lengths of hospital stay, and cumulative rates of postoperative complications were similar in the study groups. Significant differences were revealed in the incidence of postoperative hemorrhage (9 vs. 0 patients in the FH and CEH groups, respectively; p = 0.002) and in the tendency to form anal stricture (15 vs. 32 patients in the FH and CEH groups, respectively; p = 0.02). However, all cases of anal strictures were easily managed by digital dilatations. At a mean follow-up of 7.4 (range, 1-14) years, accessible patients from the CEH group remained symptom free, whereas 126 of 308 patients in the FH group indicated that they had recurrent hemorrhoidal symptoms.

CONCLUSION

Without increasing postoperative complications, CEH demonstrates an advantage compared with FH, with regard to reducing the rate of recurrence to 0 through complete hemorrhoid removal.

Meta-analysis of stapled hemorrhoidopexy vs LigaSure hemorrhoidectomy

AIM: To compare outcome of stapled hemorrhoidopexy (SH) vs LigaSure hemorrhoidectomy (LH) by a meta-analysis of available randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS: Databases, including PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and the Science Citation Index updated to December 2012, were searched. The main outcomes measured were operating time, early postoperative pain, postoperative urinary retention and bleeding, wound problems, gas or fecal incontinence, anal stenosis, length of hospital stay, residual skin tags, prolapse, and recurrence. The meta-analysis was performed using the free software Review Manager. Differences observed between the two groups were expressed as the odds ratio (OR) with 95%CI. A fixed-effects model was used to pool data when statistical heterogeneity was not present. If statistical heterogeneity was present (P < 0.05), a random-effects model was used.

RESULTS: The initial search identified 10 publications. After screening, five RCTs published as full articles were included in this meta-analysis. Among the five studies, all described a comparison of the patient baseline characteristics and showed that there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups. Although most of the analyzed outcomes were similar between the two operative techniques, the operating time for SH was significantly longer than for LH (P < 0.00001; OR= -6.39, 95%CI: -7.68 - -5.10). The incidence of residual skin tags and prolapse was significantly lower in the LH group than in the SH group [2/111 (1.8%) vs 16/105 (15.2%); P = 0.0004; OR= 0.17, 95%CI: 0.06-0.45). The incidence of recurrence after the procedures was significantly lower in the LH group than in the SH group [2/173 (1.2%) vs 13/174 (7.5%); P = 0.003; OR= 0.21, 95%CI: 0.07-0.59].

CONCLUSION: Both SH and LH are probably equally valuable techniques in modern hemorrhoid surgery. However, LigaSure might have slightly favorable immediate postoperative results and technical advantages.

Results of 666 consecutive patients treated with LigaSure hemorrhoidectomy for symptomatic prolapsed hemorrhoids with a minimum follow-up of 2 years

BACKGROUND

Our aim is to report the outcomes of hemorrhoidectomy performed via LigaSure™ with a minimum follow-up of 2 years.

METHODS

A total of 666 patients underwent hemorrhoidectomy for symptomatic prolapsed hemorrhoids (grade III and IV) via LigaSure between June 2006 and June 2008. Patient demographic and operative data were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

The mean patient age was 45.4 ± 11.1 years (x ± SD; range, 22-77), and approximately 72% had grade III hemorrhoids. All procedures were performed without complications. The operative time was 18.7 ± 4.1 minutes (range, 9-43), and hospital stay was 1.5 ± 0.6 days (range, 1-4). There was no immediate postoperative bleeding or other procedure-related complications. Twelve (1.8%) patients required urinary catheterization for a maximum of 1 day, and 21 (3.2%) patients had delayed postoperative bleeding. Most cases of bleeding resolved spontaneously; 3 patients (0.4%) required reoperation. A total of 645 patients (96.6%) responded to a follow-up telephone interview at a mean of 36 months (range, 24-49) after hemorrhoidectomy. After 1 year postoperatively, 2 patients received additional excisions for residual skin tags, 1 was treated for an anal stricture, 1 was treated for an anal fistula, and 3 were treated for anal fissures. Minor incontinence (flatus) was present in 11 (1.7%) patients, and 13 (2.0%) experienced mild bleeding caused by residual hemorrhoids; 1 patient underwent rubber-band ligation, and the others were successfully treated medically. No recurrent prolapse or persistent anal pain occurred during the follow-up period. The overall recurrence rate at 2-years follow-up was 3.1%.

CONCLUSION

The long-term recurrence rate after hemorrhoidectomy with LigaSure is low and comparable with conventional hemorrhoidectomy.

A randomized clinical trial comparing Ligasure versus stapled hemorrhoidectomy

Stapled hemorrhoidectomy (SH) and Ligasure hemorrhoidectomy (LH) are standard for hemorrhoidal disease treatment, but the surgical principle is different. This randomized clinical trial compared the 2 methods. We included 98 patients with grade 3 hemorrhoidal disease: 46 patients treated by SH and 52 patients by LH. Incidence of complications, recurrence, postoperative pain, wound healing time, and time off everyday activity were observed. The follow-up period was 24 months. We found that LH has a significantly shorter wound healing time. The recurrence rate and the overall postoperative complication rate was higher after SH but not significantly (recurrence LH vs. SH: 1.9% vs. 11.1%; complications LH vs. SH: 13.5% vs. 23.9%). Postoperative pain level, analgesic consumption, and time off everyday activity were practically the same in both groups. Both procedures can be used to treat grade 3 hemorrhoidal disease with the same efficacy, but analysis of recurrence after SH is necessary.

Optimal treatment of symptomatic hemorrhoids

Hemorrhoids are the most common anorectal complaint, and approximately 10 to 20 percent of patients with symptomatic hemorrhoids require surgery. Symptoms of hemorrhoids, such as painless rectal bleeding, tissue protrusion and mucous discharge, vary. The traditional therapeutic strategies of medicine include surgical, as well as non-surgical, treatment. To alleviate symptoms caused by hemorrhoids, oral treatments, such as fiber, suppositories and Sitz baths have been applied to patients. Other non-surgical treatments, such as infrared photocoagulation, injection sclerotherapy and rubber band ligation have been used to fixate the hemorrhoid's cushion. If non-surgical treatment has no effect, surgical treatments, such as a hemorrhoidectomy, procedure for prolapsed hemorrhoids, and transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization are used.

A systematic review comparing transanal haemorrhoidal de-arterialisation to stapled haemorrhoidopexy in the management of haemorrhoidal disease

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to systematically analyse the clinical trials on the effectiveness of transanal haemorrhoidal de-arterialisation (THD) and stapled haemorrhoidopexy (SH) in the management of haemorrhoidal disease (HD).

METHODS

Clinical trials on the effectiveness of THD and SH in the management of HD were analysed systematically using RevMan(®), and combined outcomes were expressed as risk ratio (RR) and mean difference (MD).

RESULTS

Three randomised, controlled trials encompassing 150 patients were analysed systematically. There were 80 THD patients and 70 SH patients. There was no significant heterogeneity (P = 0.40) among included trials. Therefore, in the fixed effects model, THD and SH were statistically equivalent in terms of treatment success rate (P = 0.19), operation time (P = 0.55), postoperative complications (P = 0.11) and recurrence (P = 0.46) of HD. THD was associated with significantly less postoperative pain (MD, -2.00; 95% CI, -2.06, -1.94; z = 63.59; P < 0.00001) compared to SH.

CONCLUSIONS

Both THD and SH are equally effective and can be attempted for the management of HD. However, THD is associated with significantly lesser postoperative pain and therefore may be considered a preferred procedure. This conclusion is based only on treating 150 patients by THD or SH in three moderate-quality randomised trials. A major, multicenter, randomised trial is required to validate this conclusion and investigate other variables like hospital stay, cost-effectiveness and health-related quality of life measurement.