Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Randomized Controlled Trial of LigaSure with Submucosal Dissection versus Ferguson Hemorrhoidectomy for Prolapsed Hemorrhoids

  • Published:
World Journal of Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes between the LigaSure vessel sealing system and the conventional closed Ferguson hemorrhoidectomy procedure performed by diathermy.

Methods

A series of 84 patients with grades III and IV hemorrhoids were randomized into two groups: (1) LigaSure hemorrhoidectomy with submucosal dissection (42 patients) and (2) Ferguson hemorrhoidectomy (42 patients). The patient demographics, operative details, parenteral analgesic requirement, postoperative pain score (assessed by an independent assessor), operating time, intraoperative blood loss, hospital stay, early and delayed complications, and time off from work or normal activity were recorded. The patients were regularly followed up at 1, 2, 4, 6, and 8 weeks after surgery.

Results

There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of age, gender, duration of symptoms, grade of the hemorrhoid(s), or number of hemorrhoids resected. The mean operating time for LigaSure hemorrhoidectomy with submucosal dissection was significantly shorter than that for the Ferguson hemorrhoidectomy (11.3 ± 0.4 vs. 34.2 ± 0.7 minutes; P < 0.0001). Patients treated with the LigaSure method had significantly less blood loss (P < 0.0001), a better pain score (P < 0.0001), less parenteral analgesic requirement (P < 0.0001), shorter hospital stay (P < 0.0001), and less time off from work or normal activity (P < 0.0001). There was no difference in the early and delayed postoperative complications between the two groups.

Conclusions

LigaSure hemorrhoidectomy with submucosal dissection is a safe, effective procedure for grade III and IV hemorrhoids. Patients derive greater short-term benefits: reduced intraoperative blood loss, operating time, and postoperative pain as well as earlier resumption of work or normal activity. Long-term follow-up with a larger number of patients is required to confirm the long-term results of this procedure.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. MacRae HM, McLeod RS. Comparison of hemorrhoidal treatment modalities: a meta-analysis. Dis Colon Rectum 1995;38:687–694

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Ho YH, Seow-Choen F, Tan M, et al. Randomized controlled trial of open and closed haemorrhoidectomy. Br J Surg 1997;84:1729–1730

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Milligan ET, Morgan CN, Jones LE, et al. Surgical anatomy of the anal canal, and the operative treatment of haemorrhoids. Lancet 1937;2:119–124

    Google Scholar 

  4. Ferguson JA, Heaton JR. Closed hemorrhoidectomy. Dis Colon Rectum 1959;2:176–179

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Sayfan J, Becker A, Koltun L. Sutureless closed hemorrhoidectomy: a new technique. Ann Surg 2001;234:21–24

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Rowsell M, Bello M, Hemingway DM. Circumferential mucosectomy (stapled haemorrhoidectomy) versus conventional haemorrhoidectomy: randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2000;355:779–781

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Armstrong DN, Ambroze WL, Schertzer ME, et al. Harmonic Scalpel vs. electrocautery hemorrhoidectomy: a prospective evaluation. Dis Colon Rectum 2001;44:558–564

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Palazzo FF, Francis DL, Clifton MA. Randomized clinical trial of LigasureTM versus open haemorrhoidectomy. Br J Surg 2002;89:154–157

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Jayne DG, Botterill I, Ambrose NS, et al. Randomized clinical trial of LigasureTM versus conventional diathermy for day-case haemorrhoidectomy. Br J Surg 2002;89:428–432

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Thorbeck CV, Montes MF. Haemorrhoidectomy: randomised controlled clinical trial of Ligasure® compared with Milligan-Morgan operation. Eur J Surg 2002;168:482–484

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Chung YC, Wu HJ. Clinical experience of sutureless closed hemorrhoidectomy. with LigasureTM. Dis Colon Rectum 2003;46:87–92

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Franklin EJ, Seetharam S, Lowney J, et al. Randomized clinical trial of LigasureTM vs. conventional diathermy in hemorrhoidectomy. Dis Colon Rectum 2003;46:1380–1383

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Andrews BT, Layer GT, Jackson BT, et al. Randomized trial comparing diathermy hemorrhoidectomy with the scissor dissection Milligan-Morgan operation. Dis Colon Rectum 1993;36:580–583

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. London NJ, Bramley PD, Windle R. Effect of four days of preoperative lactulose on posthaemorrhoidectomy pain: results of placebo controlled trial. BMJ 1987;295:363–364

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Carapeti EA, Kamm MA, McDonald PJ, et al. Double-blind randomised controlled trial of effect of metronidazole on pain after day-case haemorrhoidectomy. Lancet 1998;351:169–172

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Galizia G, Lieto E, Castellano P, et al. Lateral internal sphincterotomy together with haemorrhoidectomy for treatment of haemorrhoids: a randomised prospective study. Eur J Surg 2000;166:223–228

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Basdanis G, Papadopoulos VN, Michalopoulos A, et al. Randomized clinical trial of stapled hemorrhoidectomy vs open with Ligasure for prolapsed piles. Surg Endosc 2005;19:235–239

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Oughriss M, Yver R, Faucheron JL. Complications of stapled hemorrhoidectomy: a French multicentric study. Gastroenterol Clin Biol 2005;29:429–433

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Kaohsiung Medical University and Hospital, 100 Tzyou 1st Road, Kaohsiung, Taiwan 807, ROC

    Jaw-Yuan Wang MD, Fang-Ming Chen MD, Che-Jen Huang MD, Yu-Sheng Huang MD, Tsung-Jen Huang MD & Jan-Sing Hsieh MD

  2. Department of Internal Medicine, Kaohsiung Medical University and Hospital, 100 Tzyou 1st Road, Kaohsiung, Taiwan 807, ROC

    Chien-Yu Lu MD

  3. Department of Surgery, E-Da Hospital/I-Shou University, 1 E-Da Road, Jiau-shu Tsuen, Yan-chau Shiang, Kaohsiung, Taiwan 824, ROC

    Hsiang-Lin Tsai MD

Authors
  1. Jaw-Yuan Wang MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chien-Yu Lu MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hsiang-Lin Tsai MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Fang-Ming Chen MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Che-Jen Huang MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Yu-Sheng Huang MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Tsung-Jen Huang MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Jan-Sing Hsieh MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jan-Sing Hsieh MD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wang, JY., Lu, CY., Tsai, HL. et al. Randomized Controlled Trial of LigaSure with Submucosal Dissection versus Ferguson Hemorrhoidectomy for Prolapsed Hemorrhoids. World J. Surg. 30, 462–466 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-005-0297-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268-005-0297-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation