Advertisement

Techniques in Coloproctology

, Volume 11, Issue 2, pp 144–148 | Cite as

Long-term results after stapled haemorrhoidopexy for fourth-degree haemorrhoids: a prospective study with median follow-up of 6 years

  • E. Zacharakis
  • D. Kanellos
  • M. G. Pramateftakis
  • I. Kanellos
  • S. Angelopoulos
  • I. Mantzoros
  • D. Betsis
  • P. O. Nyström
Original Article

Abstract

Background

The aim of our study was to assess our early and long-term results after stapled haemorrhoidopexy for fourth-degree haemorrhoids.

Methods

Our study covers the time period from 1998 to 2002 and consists of 56 consecutive patients (33 men) with fourthdegree haemorrhoids who underwent stapled haemorrhoidopexy.

Results

During the postoperative period, 6 patients (10.7%) experienced pain for 7–14 days, which was treated with oral analgesia. Ten patients (17.8%) experienced gas incontinence and two of them also reported soiling. The incontinence subsided within 3–4 weeks. Median follow-up was 72.1 months (range, 55–56 months). Recurrence of the haemorrhoidal disease occurred in 33 patients (58.9%). The overall reintervention rate was 42.8%, as 24 patients required excisional haemorrhoidectomy by the Milligan-Morgan technique at a later stage.

Conclusions

Stapled haemorrhoidopexy seems to be a safe, low-pain but ineffective technique for the treatment of fourth-degree haemorrhoids, as it is accompanied by high recurrence and reintervention rates in the long term.

Key words

Stapled haemorrhoidopexy Complications Results Recurrence 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Milligan ETC, Morgan CN, Jones LE, Officer R (1937) Surgical anatomy of the anal canal and operative treatment of haemorrhoids. Lancet ii:1119–1124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Goulimaris I, Kanellos I, Christoforidis E, Mantzoros I, Odisseos Ch, Betsis D (2002) Stapled haemorrhoidectomy compared with Milligan-Morgan excision for the treatment of prolapsing haemorrhoids: a prospective study. Eur J Surg 168:621–625CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Pescatori M, Favetta U, Dedola S, Orsini S (1997) Transanal stapled excision of rectal mucosa prolapse. Tech Coloproctol 1:96–98Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Longo A (1998) Treatment of haemorrhoidal disease by reduction of mucosa and haemorrhoidal prolapse with a circular suturing device: a new procedure. In: Proceedings of the 6th World Congress of Endoscopic Surgery. Monduzzi, Bologna, pp 777-84Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rowsell M, Bello M, Hemingay DM (2000) Circumferential mucosectomy (stapled haemorrhoidectomy) versus conventional haemorrhoidectomy: randomized controlled trial. Lancet 355:779–781CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cheetham MJ, Mortensen NJM, Nystrom P-O, Kamm MA, Phillips RKS (2000) Persistent pain and faecal urgency after stapled haemorrhoidectomy. Lancet 356:730–733CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Shalaby R, Desoky A (2001) Randomized clinical trial of stapled versus Milligan-Morgan haemorrhoidectomy. Br J Surg 88:1049–1053CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ravo B, Amato A, Bianco V et al (2002) Complications after stapled hemorrhoidectomy: can they be prevented? Tech Coloproctol 6:83–88CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Oughriss M, Yver R, Faucheron JL (2005) Complications of stapled hemorrhoidectomy: a French multicentric study. Gastroenterol Clin Biol 29:429–433PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Thaha MA, Irvine LA, Steele RJ, Campbell KL (2005) Postdefaecation pain syndrome after circular stapled anopexy is abolished by oral nifedipine. Br J Surg 92:208–210CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Senagore AJ, Singer M, Abcarian H et al Procedure for Prolapse and Hemorrhoids (PPH) Multicenter Study Group (2004) Aprospective, randomized, controlled multicenter trial comparing stapled hemorrhoidopexy and Ferguson hemorrhoidectomy: perioperative and one-year results. Dis Colon Rectum 47:1824–1836CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gravie JF, Lehur PA, Huten N et al (2005) Stapled hemorrhoidopexy versus Milligan-Morgan hemorrhoidectomy: a prospective, randomized, multicenter trial with 2-year postoperative follow up. Ann Surg 242:29–35CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gabrielli F, Chiarelli M, Cioffi U et al (2001) Day surgery for mucosal-hemorrhoidal prolapse using a circular stapler and modified regional anesthesia. Dis Colon Rectum 44:842–844CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Petros JG, Bradley TM (1990) Factors influencing postoperative urinary retention in patients undergoing surgery for benign anorectal disease. Am J Surg 159:374–376CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Molloy RG, Kingsmore D (2000) Life threatening pelvic sepsis after stapled haemorrhoidectomy. Lancet 355:810CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Beattie GC, Lam JPH, Loudon MA (2000) Aprospective evaluation of the introduction of circumferential stapled anoplasty in the management of haemorrhoids and mucosal prolapse. Colorectal Dis 2:137–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fazio VW (2000) Early promise of stapling technique for haemorrhoidectomy. Lancet 355:768–769CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kohlstadt CM, Weher J, Prohm P (1999) Stapler hemorrhoidectomy. A new alternative to conventional methods. Zentralbl Chir 124:238–243PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pernice LG, Bartalucci B, Bencini L, Borri A, Catarzi S, Kroning K (2001) Early and late (ten years) experience with circular stapler haemorrhoidectomy. Dis Colon Rectum 44:836–841CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ortiz H, Marzo J, Armendariz P (2002) Randomized clinical trial of stapled haemorrhoidectomy versus conventional diathermy haemorrhoidectomy. Br J Surg 89:1376–1381CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ortiz H, Marzo J, Armendariz P, De Miguel M (2005) Stapled hemorrhoidopexy vs. diathermy excision for fourth-degree hemorrhoids: a randomized, clinical trial and review of the literature. Dis Colon Rectum 48:809–815CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Jayaraman S, Colquhoun PH, Malthaner RA (2006) Stapled versus conventional surgery for hemorrhoids. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 18:CD005393Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Nisar PJ, Acheson AG, Neal KR, Scholefield JH (2004) Stapled hemorrhoidopexy compared with conventional hemorrhoidectomy: systematic review of randomized, controlled trials. Dis Colon Rectum 47:1837–1845CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Brusciano L, Ayabaca SM, Pescatori M et al (2004) Reinterventions after complicated or failed stapled hemorrhoidopexy. Dis Colon Rectum 47:1846–1851CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

References

  1. 1.
    Nisar PJ, Acheson AG, Neal KR, Scholefield JH (2004) Stapled hemorrhoidopexy compared with conventional hemorrhoidectomy: systematic review of randomized, controlled trials. Dis Colon Rectum 47:1837–1845CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jayaraman S, Colquhoun PH, Malthaner RA (2006) Stapled versus conventional surgery for hemorrhoids. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 18:CD005393Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Italia 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • E. Zacharakis
    • 1
  • D. Kanellos
    • 1
  • M. G. Pramateftakis
    • 1
  • I. Kanellos
    • 1
  • S. Angelopoulos
    • 1
  • I. Mantzoros
    • 1
  • D. Betsis
    • 1
  • P. O. Nyström
    • 2
  1. 1.Fourth Academic Surgical UnitAristotle University of ThessalonikiThessaloniki, MakedoniaGreece
  2. 2.Colorectal SurgeryKarolinska University HospitalHuddinge, StockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations