Techniques in Coloproctology

, Volume 18, Issue 6, pp 607–610 | Cite as

Survey of patient satisfaction after Doppler-guided transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization performed in ambulatory settings

  • M. B. Tempel
  • E. G. Pearson
  • M. Page
  • D. Pollock
  • K. Gilmore-Lynch
  • W. Peche
  • B. Sklow
  • M. Snyder
Short Communication



Transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization (THD) is a recently developed procedure to minimize postoperative pain from hemorrhoidectomy. This technique utilizes Doppler signals to aid ligation of hemorrhoidal arteries followed by mucopexy of redundant mucosa if needed. The aim of the present study was to assess patient satisfaction after THD.


This is a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent THD at three different sites from April 2007 through October 2010. All procedures were performed in ambulatory settings according to protocol. Telephone surveys were conducted after a minimum of 1-month follow-up to assess patients' satisfaction on a scale of 1–10. Patients were asked whether the procedure had alleviated their symptoms. Patients were asked to recall duration of pain and time from surgery to return to work.


Between April 2007 and October 2010, 216 patients with grade III–IV hemorrhoids underwent THD. There were 165 males and 61 females. Average age was 52.2 ± 14.2 years. All patients were discharged the same day after meeting ambulatory surgery center discharge criteria. Postoperative difficulty urinating occurred in 37 (17 %) patients, and six of them required temporary urinary catheterization. Transitory postoperative bleeding was reported by 38 (18 %) patients. Transitory incontinence to stool and flatus occurred in 18 (9 %) and 16 patients (8 %), respectively. Pelvic muscle spasms occurred in 21 (10 %) patients. Median follow-up was 23 months (range 1–42 months) with 143 (66 %) having at least 9 months between procedure and interview. Mean patient satisfaction was 8.5 ± 0.7 (on a scale of 1–10 with 10 being the best), and 91.5 % of patients felt the procedure had “helped” them. Average number of days with discomfort was 6.7 ± 2.1. Patients returned to work after an average of 10.3 ± 3.2 days. Our study is limited by lack of long-term follow-up and by retrospective complication assessment.


Patient satisfaction with THD performed in ambulatory settings is high. Our data support performance of this procedure in an ambulatory setting.


Hemorrhoids Dearterialization Mucopexy Recurrence Bleeding Prolapse 


Conflict of interest



  1. 1.
    Rachochot JE, Petourand CH, Riovoire JO (1971) Saint Fiacre: the healer of hemorrhoids and patron saint of proctology. Am J Proctol 22:175Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jongen J, Eberstein A, Bock JU, Peleikis HG, Kahlke V (2010) Complications, recurrences, early and late reoperations after stapled haemorrhoidopexy: lessons learned from 1,233 cases. Langenbecks Arch Surg 395:1049–1054PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ravo B (2005) Septic complications after stapled hemorrhoidectomy. J Am Coll Surg 201:155–156PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Arnold S, Antonietti E, Rollinger G, Scheyer M (2002) Doppler ultrasound assisted hemorrhoid artery ligation. A new therapy in symptomatic hemorrhoids. Chirurg 73:269–273PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Avital S, Inbar R, Karin E, Greenberg R (2012) Five-year follow-up of Doppler-guided hemorrhoidal artery ligation. Tech Coloproctol 16:61–65PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Forrest NP, Mullerat J, Evans C, Middleton SB (2010) Doppler guided haemorrhoidal artery ligation with recto anal repair: a new technique for the treatment of symptomatic haemorrhoids. Int J Colorectal Dis 25:1251–1256PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ratto C (2013) THD Doppler procedure for hemorrhoids: the surgical technique. Tech Coloproctol 12. doi: 10.1007/s10151-013-1062-3 Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    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
  9. 9.
    Cavazzoni E, Bugiantella W, Graziosi L et al (2013) Emergency transanal haemorrhoidal Doppler guided dearterialization for acute and persistent haemorrhoidal bleeding. Colorectal Dis 15:e89–e92PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ratto C, Donisi L, Parello A, Litta F, Doglietto GB (2010) Evaluation of transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization as a minimally invasive therapeutic approach to hemorrhoids. Dis Colon Rectum 53:803–811PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Giordano P, Overton J, Madeddu F, Zaman S, Gravante G (2009) Transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization: a systematic review. Dis Colon Rectum 52:1665–1671PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pucher P, Sodergren M, Lord A, Darzi A, Ziprin P (2013) Clinical outcome following Doppler-guided haemorrhoidal artery ligation: a systematic review. Colorectal Dis 15:e284–e294PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chao E (2012) Improved outcomes with routine mucosal/submucosal pexy with transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization. Montefiore Medical Center Department of Surgery, New York, NY Poster presentation at New York Society for Colon and Rectal SurgeryGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Elmér SE, Nygren JO, Lenander CE (2013) A randomized trial of transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization with anopexy compared with open hemorrhoidectomy in the treatment of hemorrhoids. Dis Colon Rectum 56:484–490PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zampieri N, Castellani R, Andreoli R, Geccherle A (2012) Long-term results and quality of life in patients treated with hemorrhoidectomy using two different techniques: ligasure versus transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization. Am J Surg 204:684–688PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Italia 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. B. Tempel
    • 1
  • E. G. Pearson
    • 2
  • M. Page
    • 3
  • D. Pollock
    • 1
  • K. Gilmore-Lynch
    • 1
  • W. Peche
    • 2
  • B. Sklow
    • 2
  • M. Snyder
    • 1
  1. 1.Colon and Rectal Clinic of HoustonHoustonUSA
  2. 2.Department of SurgeryThe University of UtahSalt Lake CityUSA
  3. 3.Department of SurgeryThe Iowa ClinicDes MoinesUSA

Personalised recommendations