Abstract
PURPOSE: A prospective, randomized trial was performed between 1979 and 1981 comparing anal dilation and hemorrhoidectomy for hemorrhoidal disease at the Maastricht University Hospital. The aim of this study was to update that trial to assess long-term outcome and complications such as fecal incontinence. METHODS: A total of 138 patients with second-degree and third-degree hemorrhoids entered the study. Median follow-up was 17 (range, 8.4–18.3) years and was achieved for 118 (86 percent) patients. Group A (n=35) underwent hemorrhoidectomy and Group B (n=39) was treated with anal dilation and aftertreatment (original Lord's procedure), whereas Group C (n=44) had dilation only. Fourteen of these patients died. RESULTS: Recurrent hemorrhoids were noted for 26 percent of the patients treated with hemorrhoidectomy, for 46 percent with operative dilation with the postoperative dilation program, and for 39 percent with operative dilation without the postoperative program. The percentage of repeated treatment for the three subgroups was 11, 23, and 18 percent, respectively. The continence status remained more or less the same during the first year. However, 17 years later the anal stretch procedures caused various incontinence disorders in 52 percent of these patients. Significance was found for incontinence of flatus (from 11 to 30 patients;P=0.04) in the anal dilation groups. CONCLUSIONS: Hemorrhoidectomy can be considered to be a safe procedure for treatment of hemorrhoidal disease, with excellent long-term results. Anal dilation is associated with a high percentage of complaints of fecal incontinence. The procedure should be abandoned.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Johanson JF, Sonnenberg A. The prevalence of haemorrhoids and chronic constipation: an epidemiologic study. Gastroenterology 1990;98:380–6.
MacRae HM, McLeod RS. Comparison of hemorrhoidal treatment modalities: a meta-analysis. Dis Colon Rectum 1995;38:687–94.
Soderlund S. Results of haemorrhoidectomy according to Milligan. A follow-up study of 100 patients. Acta Chir Scand 1962;124:444–53.
Ganchrow MI, Mazier WP, Friend WG, Ferguson JA. Haemorrhoidecotmy revisited: a computer analysis of 2038 cases. Dis Colon Rectum 1971;14:128–33.
Lord PH. A new regimen for the treatment of haemorrhoids. Proc R Soc Med 1968;61:935–6.
Isbister WH, Prasad J. Fissure in ano. Aust N Z J Surg 1995;65:107–8.
Walls AD, Ruckley CV. A five year follow-up of Lord's dilatation for haemorrhoids. Lancet 1976;1:1212–3.
McCaffrey J. Lord treatment of haemorrhoids. Four year follow-up of fifty patients. Lancet 1975;1:133–4.
Williams NS. Haemorrhoidal disease. In. Williams NS, Keighley MR, eds. Surgery of the anus, rectum and colon. London: WB Saunders, 1993:295–364.
Baeten CG. Haemorrhoids, evaluation of methods of treatment [thesis]. Maastricht, the Netherlands: Maastricht University; 1985.
Milligan ET, Morgan CN, Jones LE, Officer R. Surgical anatomy of the anal canal, and the operative treatment of haemorrhoids. Lancet 1937;2:1123–9.
Carapeti EA, Kamm MA, McDonald PJ, Philips RK. Double-blind randomised controlled trial of effect of metronidazole on pain after day-case haemorrhoidectomy. Lancet 1998;351:169–72.
van Tets WF, Kuijpers JH, Tran K, Mollen R, van Goor H. Influence of Parks' anal retractor on anal sphincter pressures. Dis Colon Rectum 1997;40:1042–5.
Speakman CT, Burnett SJ, Kamm MA, Bartram CI. Sphincter injury after anal dilatation demonstrated by anal endosonography. Br J Surg 1991;78:1429–30.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
About this article
Cite this article
Konsten, J., Baeten, C.G.M.I. Hemorrhoidectomyvs. Lord's method. Dis Colon Rectum 43, 503–506 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02237194
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02237194