Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Harmonic Scalpel®vs. electrocautery hemorrhoidectomy: A prospective evaluation

  • Original Contributions
  • Published:
Diseases of the Colon & Rectum

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Management of posthemorrhoidectomy pain remains a very unsatisfactory clinical dilemma. Compared with electrocautery and laser, the Harmonic Scalpel® causes minimal lateral thermal injury during tissue dissection. PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to establish whether decreased lateral thermal injury translated into diminished posthemorrhoidectomy pain. METHODS: A prospective randomized trial comparing Harmonic Scalpel® hemorrhoidectomy and electrocautery was undertaken. Fifty consecutive patients were randomized into two groups: Harmonic Scalpel® and electrocautery hemorrhoidectomy. The indications included Grade III internal hemorrhoids with external components or Grade IV disease. Patients with additional anorectal pathology (fissure of fistula) were excluded, as were patients with neurologic deficits, chronic pain syndrome, and those already taking narcotic analgesics. Pain was assessed using a visual analog scale preoperatively and on postoperative Days 1, 2, 7, 14, and 28. Twenty-four-hour narcotic usage (Hydrocodone, 10 mg) was recorded on postoperative Days 1, 2, 7, 14, and 28. A three-quadrant modified Ferguson hemorrhoidectomy was performed with each patient in the prone jackknife position. RESULTS: Pain in the Harmonic Scalpel® hemorrhoidectomy group was significantly less than in electrocautery patients on each postoperative day studied. Analgesic requirements were also significantly less in the Harmonic Scalpel® group on Days 1, 2, 7, and 14. There was no correlation between postoperative pain and grade of hemorrhoid, status of the surgical incision (openvs. closed), or any other study variable. Fifty-five percent of Harmonic Scalpel® patients returned to work within one week of surgery, compared with 23 percent of electrocautery patients. CONCLUSION: The study demonstrates significantly reduced postoperative pain after Harmonic Scalpel® hemorrhoidectomy compared with electrocautery controls. The diminished postoperative pain in the Harmonic Scalpel® group likely results from the avoidance of lateral thermal injury.

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. Goldstein ET, Williamson PR, Larach SW. Subcutaneous morphine pump for postoperative hemorrhoidectomy pain management. Dis Colon Rectum 1993;36:439–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Kilbride M, Morse M, Senagore A. Transdermal fentanyl improves management of postoperative hemorrhoidectomy pain. Dis Colon Rectum 1994;37:1070–2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. O'Donovan S, Ferrara A, Larach S, Williamson P. Intraoperative use of Toradol® facilitates outpatient hemorrhoidectomy. Dis Colon Rectum 1994;37:793–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Chester JF, Stanford BJ, Gazet J-C. Analgesic benefit of locally injected bupivacaine after hemorrhoidectomy. Dis Colon Rectum 1990;33:487–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Lacerda-Filho A, Cunha-Melo JR. Outpatient haemorrhoidectomy under local anaesthesia. Eur J Surg 1997;163:935–40.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Neto JA, Quilici FA, Cordeiro F, Reis JA. Open versus semi-open hemorrhoidectomy: a random trial. Int Surg 1992;77:84–90.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Ho YH, Seow-Choen F, Tan M, Leong AF. Randomized controlled trial of open and closed haemorrhoidectomy. Br J Surg 1997;84:1729–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Mathai V, Ong BC, Ho YH. Randomized controlled trial of lateral internal sphincterotomy with haemorrhoidectomy. Br J Surg 1996;83:380–2.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. O'Bichere A, Laniado M, Sellu D. Stapled haemorrhoidectomy: a feasible day-case procedure. Br J Surg 1998;85:377–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hosch SB, Knoefel WT, Pichlmeier U,et al. Surgical treatment of piles: prospective, randomized study of Parksvs. Milligan-Morgan hemorrhoidectomy. Dis Colon Rectum 1998;41:159–64.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Patel N, O'Connor T. Suture haemorrhoidectomy: a day-only alternative. Aust N Z J Surg 1996;66:830–1.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Seow-Choen F, Low HC. Prospective randomized study of radical versus four piles haemorrhoidectomy for symptomatic large circumferential prolapsed piles. Br J Surg 1995;82:188–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Ui Y. Anoderm-preserving, completely closed hemorrhoidectomy with no mucosal incision. Dis Colon Rectum 1997;40(Suppl):S99-S101.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Leff EI. Hemorrhoidectomy-laservs. nonlaser: outpatient surgical experience. Dis Colon Rectum 1992;35:743–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Smith LE. Hemorrhoidectomy with lasers and other contemporary modalities. Surg Clin North Am 1992;72:665–79.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Hodgson WJ, Morgan J. Ambulatory hemorrhoidectomy with CO2 laser. Dis Colon Rectum 1995;38:1265–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Chia YW, Darzl A, Speakman CT, Hill AD, Jameson JS, Henry MM. CO2 laser haemorrhoidectomy—does it alter anorectal function or decrease pain compared to conventional haemorrhoidectomy? Int J Colorectal Dis 1995;10:22–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Wang JY, Chang-Chien CR, Chen J-S, Lai C-R, Tang RP. The role of lasers in hemorrhoidectomy. Dis Colon Rectum 1991;34:78–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Senagore A, Mazier WP, Luchtefeld MA, MacKeigan JM, Wengert T. Treatment of advanced hemorrhoidal disease: a prospective, randomized comparison of cold scalpelvs. contact Nd:YAG laser. Dis Colon Rectum 1993;36:1042–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. McCarus SD. Physiologic mechanism of the ultrasonically activated scalpel. J Am Assoc Gynecol Laparosc 1996;3:601–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Amaral JF. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy in 200 consecutive patients using an ultrasonically activated scalpel. Surg Laparosc Endosc 1995;5:255–62.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Bayer I, Mysolovaty B, Picovsky BM. Rubber band ligation of hemorrhoids. J Clin Gastroenterol 1996;23:50–2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. MacRae HM, McLeod RS. Comparison of hemorrhoidal treatment modalities: a meta-analysis. Dis Colon Rectum 1995;38:687–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Georgia Colon and Rectal Surgical Clinic, 5555 Peachtree Dunwoody Road NE, 30342, Atlanta, Georgia

    David N. Armstrong M.D. (F.R.C.S.), Wayne L. Ambroze M.D., Marion E. Schertzer M.D. & Guy R. Orangio M.D.

Authors
  1. David N. Armstrong M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Wayne L. Ambroze M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marion E. Schertzer M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Guy R. Orangio M.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

About this article

Cite this article

Armstrong, D.N., Ambroze, W.L., Schertzer, M.E. et al. Harmonic Scalpel®vs. electrocautery hemorrhoidectomy: A prospective evaluation. Dis Colon Rectum 44, 558–564 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02234329

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02234329

Key words

Search

Navigation