Abstract
Purpose
The procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids (PPH) has the advantage of less postoperative pain. However, serious postoperative complications have been reported after PPH, and the postoperative recurrence rate is high in comparison with conventional Milligan-Morgan hemorrhoidectomy (MMH). The purpose of this study was to evaluate PPH with low rectal anastomosis (PPH-LA) in comparison with the original PPH and MMH.
Methods
Among a total of 1315 patients with hemorrhoids, MMH was conducted in 322, original PPH using a PPH 01 stapler (PPH01) in 63, PPH-LA using 01 (PPH-LA01) in 236, 03 (PPH-LA03) in 649, and sclerotherapy (SCL) in 45.
Results
Length of hospital stay and number of working days lost were significantly greater for MMH than for any form of PPH. The rate of massive postoperative bleeding was significantly lower after PPH-LA03 than after PPH01 or PPH-LA01. No serious postoperative complications occurred after any form of PPH. A significantly higher proportion of patients complained of continued prolapse after PPH01 than after MMH, PPH-LA01, or -LA03. The 5- and 16-year postoperative cumulative recurrence rates after PPH-LA03 were significantly lower than after PPH01.
Conclusions
The postoperative cumulative recurrence rate after PPH-LA03 is as low as that after MMH for up to 16 years, and compared with the original PPH01, the effectiveness is higher and the postoperative cumulative recurrence rate for up to 16 years is significantly lower. We conclude that PPH-LA03 is a superior procedure for hemorrhoids, having less postoperative pain and a low rate of recurrence.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Longo A (1998) Treatment of hemorrhoids disease by reduction of mucosa and hemorrhoidal prolapse with a circular suturing device: a new procedure. In: Proceedings of the 6th world congress of endoscopic surgery. Rome, Italy, pp 777–784
Rowsell M, Bello M, Hemingway DM (2000) Circumferential mucosectomy (stapled haemorrhoidectomy) versus conventional haemorrhoidectomy: randomised controlled trial. Lancet 355:779–781
Mehigan BJ, Monson JR, Hartley JE (2000) Stapling procedure for haemorrhoids versus Milligan-Morgan haemorrhoidectomy: randomised controlled trial. Lancet 355:782–785
Ganio E, Altomare DF, Gabrielli F et al (2001) Prospective randomized multicentre trial comparing stapled with open haemorrhoidectomy. Br J Surg 88:669–674
Nisar PJ, Acheson AG, Neal KR et al (2004) Stapled hemorrhoidopexy compared with conventional hemorrhoidectomy: systematic review of randomized, controlled trials. Dis Colon rectum 47:1837–1845
Jayaraman S, Colquhoun PH, Malthaner RA (2007) Stapled hemorrhoidopexy is associated with a higher long-term recurrence rate of internal hemorrhoids compared with conventional excisional hemorrhoid surgery. Dis Colon rectum 50:1297–1305
Jayaraman S, Colquhoun PH, Malthaner RA (2006) Stapled versus conventional surgery for hemorrhoids. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 18:CD005393
Ammaturo C, Tufano A, Spiniello E et al (2012) Stapled haemorrhoidopexy vs. Milligan-Morgan haemorrhoidectomy for grade III haemorrhoids: a randomized clinical trial. G Chir 33:346–351
Cerato MM, Cerato NL, Passos P et al (2014) Surgical treatment of hemorrhoids: a critical appraisal of the current options. Arq Bras Cir Dig 27:66–70
Wang GQ, Liu Y, Liu Q et al (2013) A meta-analysis on short and long term efficacy and safety of procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids. Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi 51:1034–1038
Tjandra JJ, Chan MK (2007) Systematic review on the procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids (stapled hemorrhoidopexy). Dis Colon rectum 50:878–892
Wong LY, Jiang JK, Chang SC et al (2003) Rectal perforation: a life-threatening complication of stapled hemorrhoidectomy: report of a case. Dis Colon rectum 46:116–117
Molloy RG, Kingsmore D (2000) Life threatening pelvic sepsis after stapled haemorrhoidectomy. Lancet 355:810
Maw A, Eu KW, Seow-Choen F (2002) Retroperitoneal sepsis complicating stapled hemorrhoidectomy: report of a case and review of the literature. Dis Colon rectum 45:826–828
McDonald PJ, Bona R, Cohen CR (2004) Rectovaginal fistula after stapled haemorrhoidopexy. Color Dis 6:64–65
Angelone G, Giardiello C, Prota C (2006) Stapled hemorrhoidopexy. Complications and 2-year follow-up. Chir Ital 58:753–760
Thaha MA, Irvine LA, Steele RJ et al (2005) Postdefaecation pain syndrome after circular stapled anopexy is abolished by oral nifedipine. Br J Surg 92:208–210
Pescatori M, Gagliardi G (2008) Postoperative complications after procedure for prolapsed hemorrhoids (PPH) and stapled transanal rectal resection (STARR) procedures. Tech Coloproctol 12:7–19
Brusciano L, Ayabaca SM, Pescatori M et al (2004) Reinterventions after complicated or failed stapled hemorrhoidopexy. Dis Colon rectum 47:1846–1851
Khubchandani I, Fealk MH, Reed JF 3rd et al (2009) Is there a post-PPH syndrome? Tech Coloproctol 13:141–144
Senagore AJ, Singer M, Abcarian H et al (2004) A prospective, randomized, controlled multicenter trial comparing stapled hemorrhoidopexy and Ferguson hemorrhoidectomy: perioperative and one-year results. Dis Colon rectum 47:1824–1836
Acknowledgements
The authors thank for the assistance offered by H. Hirobe, R. Iida, and our co-workers working in Fukuiken-Saiseikai hospital.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Iida, Y., Saito, H., Takashima, Y. et al. Procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids (PPH) with low rectal anastomosis using a PPH 03 stapler: low rate of recurrence and postoperative complications. Int J Colorectal Dis 32, 1687–1692 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-017-2908-3
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-017-2908-3