Advertisement

Techniques in Coloproctology

, Volume 13, Issue 2, pp 141–144 | Cite as

Is there a post-PPH syndrome?

  • I. Khubchandani
  • M. H. Fealk
  • J. F. ReedIII
Original Article

Abstract

Background

Despite early studies reporting significant decreases in postoperative pain and morbidity with the procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids (PPH) compared to traditional hemorrhoidectomy, certain complications and long-term efficacy remain uncertain. This study was performed to assess the prevalence of usage of PPH and the observed postoperative complaints and complications.

Methods

A questionnaire was mailed to national and international members of the American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons (ASCRS) and the accumulated data were reviewed.

Results

The rate of response to the 2,642 questionnaires was 28.5% (n=754). Of the 754 respondents, 531 (70.4%) had performed PPH and 451 (84.9%) continued to perform PPH. The most commonly reported postoperative complaint was delayed postoperative pain. Pain lasting for months was reported by 15.1% of respondents. Persistent bleeding was reported by 34.5%, and 40.9% felt there is a post-PPH syndrome.

Conclusions

Some long-term studies critically examining PPH have come to fruition. A majority of respondents continued to perform PPH. Nearly half of these agreed that there is a “post-PPH syndrome” relating to postoperative morbidities. The most disturbing morbidity was lasting perineal pain of unexplained etiology demanding challenging management. Persistent bleeding from hemorrhoidal disease distal to the staple line requires further management and raises the question as to the use of PPH as a permanent remedial procedure.

Key words

PPH Stapled hemorrhoidopexy Post-operative complications Hemorrhoids PPH syndrome 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Cheetham MJ, Mortensen NJ, Nystrom PO et al (2000) Persistent pain and faecal urgency after stapled haemorrhoidectomy. Lancet 356:730–733PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pescatori M, Spyrou M, Cobellis L et al (2006) The rectal pocket syndrome after stapled mucosectomy. Colorectal Dis 8:808–811PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Raymond TM, Raman SR, Basnyat PS (2008) First case of rectal inclusion cyst after stapled haemorrhoidopexy (PPH). Colorectal Dis 10:733–734PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jongen J, Pfister K (2009) Response to “First case of rectal inclusion cyst after stapled haemorrhoidopexy (PPH)” (Raymond et al., Colorectal Dis 2008;10:733–734). Colorectal Dis 11:102–103PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Esser S, Khubchandani IT, Rakhmanine MI (2004) Stapled hemorrhoidectomy with local anesthesia can be performed safely and cost efficiently. Dis Colon Rectum 47:1164–1169PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Thaha MA, Irvine LA, Steele RJ et al (2005) Postdefaecation pain syndrome after circular stapled anopexy is abolished by oral nifedipine. Br J Surg 92:208–210PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pescatori M, Gagliardi G (2008) Postoperative complications after procedure for prolapsed hemorrhoids (PPH) and stapled transanal rectal resection (STARR) procedures. Tech Coloproctol 12:7–19PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Brusciano L, Ayabaca SM, Pescatori M et al (2004) Reinventions after complicated or failed stapled hemorrhoidopexy. Dis Colon Rectum 47:1846–1851PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    De Nardi P, Bottini C, Faticanti Scucchi L et al (2007) Proctalgia in a patient with staples retained in the puborectalis muscle after STARR operation. Tech Coloproctol 11:353–356PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ripetti V (2006) Efficacy of sacral nerve stimulation for fecal incontinence: results of a multicenter double-blind crossover study. Tech Coloproctol 10:159–160PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    De Nardi P, Corsetti M, Passaretti S et al (2008) Evaluation of rectal sensory and motor function by means of the electronic barostat after stapled hemorrhoidopexy. Dis Colon Rectum 51:1255–1260PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ho Y-H, Tsang C, Tang CL et al (2000) Anal sphincter injuries from stapling instruments introduced transanally. Randomized, controlled study with endoanal ultrasound and anorectal manometry. Dis Colon Rectum 43:169–173PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ng K-H, Ho K-S, Ooi B-S et al (2006) Experience of 3711 stapled haemorrhoidectomy operations. Br J Surg 93:226–230PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pescatori M, Seow-Choen F (2003) Use and abuse of new technologies in colorectal surgery. Tech Coloproctol 7:1–2PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Italia 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Surgery, Division of Colorectal SurgeryLehigh Valley Health NetworkAllentownUSA
  2. 2.AlbuquerqueUSA

Personalised recommendations