Advertisement

International Journal of Colorectal Disease

, Volume 22, Issue 8, pp 955–961 | Cite as

Randomized comparison between stapled hemorrhoidopexy and Ferguson hemorrhoidectomy for grade III hemorrhoids in Taiwan: a prospective study

  • Wen-Shih Huang
  • Chih-Chien Chin
  • Chong-Hung Yeh
  • Paul Y. Lin
  • Jeng-Yi Wang
Original Article

Abstract

Purpose

Short-term and mid-term outcomes of stapled hemorrhoidopexy (SH) were compared with those for Ferguson hemorrhoidectomy (FH) for treating hemorrhoids.

Materials and methods

Patients with prolapsed hemorrhoids were randomized into two groups treated with SH (N = 300) and FH (N = 296) at Chang Gung Memorial Hospital at Chiayi in Taiwan between January 2002 and December 2004. The outcomes of the procedures were evaluated postoperatively (short-term, i.e., intra-/postoperative conditions, hospital stay, pain intensity scoring, time off work, and procedure-related morbidity) and over a follow-up period of minimum 18 months (mid-term, i.e., relapse of prolapse and/or bleeding, anal stricture, anal sepsis, and the acceptability of the procedures to the patients).

Results

SH was superior to FH in operative time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative pain intensity, and return to work. Based on telephone interviews over the follow-up period, most patients who received SH appreciated the procedure better than those with FH.

Conclusions

This study confirms that SH generates less postoperative suffering, less time off work, and more complete resolution of primary symptoms associated with hemorrhoids in the mid-term follow-up than FH.

Keywords

Stapled hemorrhoidopexy Ferguson hemorrhoidectomy Hemorrhoids Prospective Randomized 

References

  1. 1.
    Corman ML (ed) (2005) Hemorrhoids. In: Colon & rectal surgery, 5th edn. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, p 177Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Longo A (1998) Treatment of hemorrhoidal disease by reduction of mucosa and hemorrhoidal prolapse with a circular suturing device: a new procedure. In: Proceedings of the 6th world congress of endoscopic surgery, Rome, Italy, 3–6 June 1998Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Singer MA, Cintron JR, Fleshman JW, Chaudry V, Birnbaum EH, Read TE, Spitz JS, Abcarian H (2002) Early experience with stapled hemorrhoidectomy in the United States. Dis Colon Rectum 45:260–267Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brown SR, Ballan K, Ho E, Ho Fams YH, Seow-Choen F (2001) Stapled mucosectomy for acute thrombosed circumferentially prolapsed piles: a prospective randomized comparison with conventional haemorrhoidectomy. Colorectal Dis 3:175–178PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cheetham MJ, Cohen CR, Kamm MA, Phillips RK (2003) A randomized, controlled trial of diathermy hemorrhoidectomy vs. stapled hemorrhoidectomy in an intended day-care setting with longer-term follow-up. Dis Colon Rectum 46:491–497PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Correa-Rovelo JM, Tellez O, Obregon L, Miranda-Gomez A, Moran S (2002) Stapled rectal mucosectomy vs. closed hemorrhoidectomy: a randomized, clinical trial. Dis Colon Rectum 45:1367–1375PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hetzer FH, Demartines N, Handschin AE, Clavien PA (2002) Stapled vs. excision hemorrhoidectomy: long-term results of a prospective randomized trial. Arch Surg 137:337–340PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Senagore AJ, Singer M, Abcarian H, Fleshman J, Corman M, Wexner S, Nivatvongs S (2004) A prospective, randomized, controlled multicenter trial comparing stapled hemorrhoidopexy and Ferguson hemorrhoidectomy: perioperative and one-year results. Dis Colon Rectum 47:1824–1836PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ganio E, Altomare DF, Gabrielli F, Milito G, Canuti S (2001) Prospective randomized multicentre trial comparing stapled with open haemorrhoidectomy. Br J Surg 88:669–674PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ho Y-H, Cheong W-K, Tsang C, Ho J, Tang C-L, Seow-Choen F (2000) Stapled hemorrhoidectomy “ cost and effectiveness: randomized, controlled trial including incontinence scoring, anorectal monometry, and endoanal ultrasound assessments at up to three months. Dis Colon Rectum 43:1666–1675PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wilson MS, Pope V, Doran HE, Fearn SJ, Brough WA (2002) Objective comparison of stapled anopexy and open hemorrhoidectomy: a randomized, controlled trial. Dis Colon Rectum 45:1437–1444PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kairaluoma M, Nuorva K, Kellokumpu I (2003) Day-case stapled (circular) vs. diathermy hemorrhoidectomy: a randomized, controlled trial evaluating surgical and functional outcome. Dis Colon Rectum 46:93–99PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Maw A, Concepcion R, Eu KW, Seow-Choen F, Heah SM, Tang CL, Tan AL (2003) Prospective randomized study of bacteraemia in diathermy and stapled haemorrhoidectomy. Br J Surg 90:222–226PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mehigan BJ, Monson JR, Hartley JE (2000) Stapling procedure for haemorrhoids versus Milligan–Morgan haemorrhoidectomy: randomized controlled trial. Lancet 355:782–785PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ortiz H, Marzo J, Armendariz P (2002) Randomized clinical trial of stapled haemorrhoidopexy versus conventional diathermy haemorrhoidectomy. Br J Surg 89:1376–1381PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Palimento D, Picchio M, Attanasio U, Lombardi A, Bambini C, Renda A (2003) Stapled and open hemorrhoidectomy: randomized controlled trial of early results. World J Surg 27:203–207PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pavlidis T, Papaziogas B, Souparis A, Patsas A, Koutelidakis I, Papaziogas T (2002) Modern stapled Longo procedure vs. conventional Milligan–Morgan hemorrhoidectomy: a randomized controlled trial. Int J Colorectal Dis 17:50–53PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Roswell M, Bello M, Hemingway DM (2001) Circumferential mucosectomy (stapled haemorrhoidectomy) versus conventional haemorrhoidectomy: randomized controlled trial. Lancet 355:779–781CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Shalaby R, Desoky A (2001) Randomized clinical trial of stapled versus Milligan–Morgan haemorrhoidectomy. Br J Surg 88:1049–1053PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lan P, Wu X, Zhou X, Wang J, Zhang L (2006) The safety and efficacy of stapled hemorrhoidectomy in the treatment of hemorrhoids: a systemic review and meta-analysis of ten randomized control trials. Int J Colorectal Dis 21:172–178PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bikhchandani J, Agarwal PN, Kant R, Malik VK (2005) Randomized controlled trial to compare the early and mid-term results of stapled versus open hemorrhoidectomy. Am J Surg 189:56–60PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Picchio M, Palimento D, Attanasio U, Renda A (2006) Stapled vs open hemorrhoidectomy: long-term outcome of a randomized controlled trial. Int J Colorectal Dis 21(7):668–669PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ferguson JA, Mazier WP, Ganchrow MI, Friend WG (1971) The closed technique of hemorrhoidectomy. Surgery 70:480–484PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Huang WS, Wang JY, Chin CC (2003) Stapled hemorrhoidectomy with PPH-33 versus conventional Ferguson hemorrhoidectomy: preliminary analysis in Chang Gung Memorial Hospital. J Soc Colorectal Surg ROC 14:33–38Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Jongen J, Bock JU, Peleikis HG, Eberstein A (2006) Complications and reoperations in stapled anopexy: learning by doing. Int J Colorectal Dis 21:166–171PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Schmidt MP, Fischbein J, Shatavi H (2002) Stapler-haemorrhoidectomy vs. plastisch-rekonstruktive verfahren. OP-Verfahren im klinischen Vergleich. Zentralbl Chir 127:15–18PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Corman ML, Gravie JF, Hager T, Loudon MA, Mascagni D, Mystrom PO, Seow-Choen F, Abcarian H, Marcello P, Weiss E, Longo A (2003) Stapled Haemorrhoidopexy: a consensus position paper by an international working party-indications, contra-indications and technique. Colorectal Dis 5:304–310PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Huang WS, Chin CC, Yeh CH, Lin PY, Wang JY (2006) The late onset of an anal abscess caused by a chicken bone that complicated stapled hemorrhoidopexy. Int J Colorectal Dis (in press). http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00384-006-0160-3. Cited 27 May 2006
  29. 29.
    Molloy RG, Kingsmore D (2000) Life threatening pelvic sepsis after stapled haemorrhoidectomy. Lancet 355:810PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Ripetti V, Caricato M, Arullani A (2002) Rectal perforation, retropneumoperitoneum, and pneumomediastinum after stapling procedure for prolapsed hemorrhoids. Dis Colon Rectum 45:268–270PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Maw A, Eu KW, Seow-Choen F (2002) Retroperitoneal sepsis complicating stapled hemorrhoidectomy. Dis Colon Rectum 45:826–828PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    McDonald PJ, Bona R, Cohen CR (2004) Rectovaginal fistula after stapled haemorrhoidopexy. Colorectal Dis 6:64–65PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Chen HH, Wang JY, Changchien CR, Yeh CY, Tsai WS, Tang R (2002) Effective management of posthemorrhoidectomy secondary hemorrhage using rectal irrigation. Dis Colon Rectum 45:234–238PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wen-Shih Huang
    • 1
    • 2
  • Chih-Chien Chin
    • 1
  • Chong-Hung Yeh
    • 1
  • Paul Y. Lin
    • 3
  • Jeng-Yi Wang
    • 1
  1. 1.Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, Department of SurgeryChang Gung Memorial HospitalPutzTaiwan
  2. 2.Graduate Institute of Clinical Medical Science, College of MedicineChang Gung UniversityTaoyuanTaiwan
  3. 3.Division of Anatomical Pathology, Department of PathologyChang Gung Memorial HospitalChiayiTaiwan

Personalised recommendations