Advertisement

Techniques in Coloproctology

, Volume 15, Issue 3, pp 267–271 | Cite as

Outcome of stapled hemorrhoidopexy versus doppler-guided hemorrhoidal artery ligation for grade III hemorrhoids

  • S. Avital
  • R. Itah
  • Y. Skornick
  • R. Greenberg
Original Article

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate the long-term results, early and late complication rates, and overall satisfaction of patients with grade III hemorrhoids treated by stapled hemorrhoidopexy (SH) or Doppler-guided hemorrhoidal artery ligation (DGHAL).

Methods

Operative and follow-up patients’ data were prospectively collected for patients undergoing either SH or DGHAL by a single surgeon during a 2-year period. A retrospective comparison between patients’ outcome operated by one of the two methods was made based on this data. Clinical data on postoperative pain, analgesic requirements, time to first bowel movement and functional recovery were collected at five postoperative follow-up visits (1 and 6 weeks, 6, 12, and 18 months). Data on patient satisfaction, recurrence of hemorrhoidal symptoms and further treatments were obtained by a standardized questionnaire that was conducted during the last visit 18 months postoperatively.

Results

A total of 63 patients underwent SH (aged 52 ± 3.2 years) and 51 patients underwent DGHAL (aged 50 ± 7.3 years). DGHAL patients experienced less postoperative pain as scored by pain during bowel movement (2.1 ± 1.4 vs. 5.5 ± 1.9 for SH), and required fewer analgesics postoperatively. Hospital stay, time to first bowel movement, and complete functional recovery were also significantly shorter for the DGHAL patients. Nine DGHAL patients (18%) suffered from persistent bleeding or prolapses and required additional treatment compared with 2 (3%) patients in the SH group. SH patients reported greater satisfaction compared with DGHAL patients at 1 year postoperatively.

Conclusion

Both SH and DGHAL are safe procedures and have similar effectiveness for treating grade III hemorrhoids. DGHAL is less painful and provides earlier functional recovery, but is associated with higher recurrence rates and lower satisfaction rates compared with SH.

Keywords

Stapled hemorrhoidopexy Doppler-guided hemorrhoidal artery ligation Hemorrhoids 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Esther Eshkol is thanked for editorial assistance.

Conflict of interest

The Authors declare that they have no conflict related to the publication of this article.

References

  1. 1.
    Bleday R, Pena JP, Rothenberger DA, Goldberg SM, Buls JG (1992) Symptomatic hemorrhoids: current incidence and complications of operative therapy. Dis Colon Rectum 35:477–481PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Loder PB, Kamm MA, Nicholls RJ, Phillips RK (1994) Haemorrhoids: pathology, pathophysiology and aetiology. Br J Surg 81:946–954PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Milligan ETC, Morgan CN, Jones LE, Officer R (1937) Surgical anatomy of the anal canal and the operative treatment of haemorrhoids. Lancet 2:1119–1123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Longo A (1998) Treatment of hemorrhoidal disease by reduction of mucosal and hemorrhoidal prolapse with circular suturing device: a new procedure. In: Proceedings of the 6th world congress of endoscopic surgery. Monduzzi Editore, Bologna, pp 777–784Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Tjandra JJ, Chan MK (2007) Systematic review on the procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids (stapled hemorrhoidopexy). Dis Colon Rectum 50:878–892PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    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
  7. 7.
    Mehigan BJ, Monson JR, Hartley JE (2000) Stapling procedure for haemorrhoids versus Milligan-Morgan haemorrhoidectomy: randomised controlled trial. Lancet 355:782–785PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Shalaby R, Desoky A (2001) Randomized clinical trial of stapled versus Milligan-Morgan haemorrhoidectomy. Br J Surg 88:1049–1053PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Morinaga K, Hasuda K, Ikeda T (1995) A novel therapy for internal hemorrhoids: ligation of the hemorrhoidal artery with a newly devised instrument (Moricorn) in conjunction with a Doppler flowmeter. Am J Gastroenterol 90:610–613PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sohn N, Aronoff JS, Cohen FS, Weinstein MA (2001) Transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization is an alternative to operative hemorrhoidectomy. Am J Surg 182:515–519PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Greenberg R, Karin E, Avital S, Skornick Y, Werbin N (2006) First 100 cases with Doppler-guided hemorrhoidal artery ligation. Dis Colon Rectum 49:485–489PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Scheyer M, Antonietti E, Rollinger G, Mall H, Arnold S (2006) Doppler-guided hemorrhoidal artery ligation. Am J Surg 191:89–93PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bursics A, Morvay K, Kupcsulik P, Flautner L (2004) Comparison of early and 1-year follow-up results of conventional hemorrhoidectomy and hemorrhoid artery ligation: a randomized study. Int J Colorectal Dis 19:176–180PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wilkerson PM, Strbac M, Reece-Smith H, Middleton SB (2009) Doppler-guided haemorrhoidal artery ligation: long-term outcome and patient satisfaction. Colorectal Dis 11:394–400PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Thomson WH (1975) The nature of haemorrhoids. Br J Surg 62:542–552PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wałega P, Scheyer M, Kenig J et al (2008) Two-center experience in the treatment of hemorrhoidal disease using Doppler-guided hemorrhoidal artery ligation: functional results after 1-year follow-up. Surg Endosc 22:2379–2383PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Felt-Bersma RJ, van Baren R, Koorevaar M, Strijers RL, Cuesta MA (1995) Unsuspected sphincter defects shown by anal endosonography after anorectal surgery. A prospective study. Dis Colon Rectum 38:249–253PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ho YH, Cheong WK, Tsang C et al (2000) Stapled hemorrhoidectomy–cost and effectiveness. Randomized, controlled trial including incontinence scoring, anorectal manometry, and endoanal ultrasound assessments at up to 3 months. Dis Colon Rectum 43:1666–1675PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kolbert GW, Raulf F (2002) Evaluation of Longo’s technique for haemorrhoidectomy by doppler ultrasound measurement of the superior rectal artery. Zentralbl Chir 127:19–20PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Giordano P, Overton J, Madeddu F, Zaman S, Gravante G (2009) Transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization: a systematic review. Dis Colon Rectum 52:1665–1671PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Meintjes D (2000) Doppler-guided hemorrhoidal artery ligation (HAL) for the treatment of hemorrhoids. Results in 1415 patients. Clin Rep. Available at: http://ww.pharma.it/eng/pati.htm. Accessed March 2011
  22. 22.
    Aigner F, Bonatti H, Peer S et al (2010) Vascular considerations for stapled haemorrhoidopexy. Colorectal Dis 12:452–458PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Surgery ‘A’, Tel-Aviv Medical Center and the Sackler Faculty of MedicineTel-Aviv UniversityTel-AvivIsrael

Personalised recommendations