Abstract
Conventional hemorrhoidectomy for grade III and IV hemorrhoids is a tedious procedure associated with significant morbidity and a prolonged convalescence. We compared Ligasure™ hemorrhoidectomy with conventional ‘closed’ Ferguson’s hemorrhoidectomy for the treatment of grade III and IV hemorrhoids. Forty-eight consecutive patients of grade III and IV hemorrhoids were randomized to either the Ligasure™ hemorrhoidectomy (28 patients) or Ferguson’s hemorrhoidectomy (20 patients). The hemorrhoidal predicle was coagulated with Ligasure™ in the Ligasure™ group and transfied with 2/0 chromic catgut in Ferguson’s method. In comparison with Ferguson’s method, Ligasure™ hemorrhoidectomy had a shorter operating time (29 vs 12.5 min), less blood loss (22 vs 11.5 ml), less post operative pain as measured on VAS scale and less postoperative complications including hemorrhage (10% vs 3.5%), urinary retention (10% vs 3.5%) and wound breakdown (20% vs 14%). The submucosal dissection technique with Ligasure™ coagulation of the hemorrhoidal pedicle is safe and effective. The blood vessels and tissue are reduced to a wafer thin seal with good hemostasis. Suturing is not required as the mucosal tissue over the pedicle is sealed off with the current. There is minimal lateral spread of either thermal or electrical energy. The external components of the hemorrhoids can also be treated at the same time. Because of its ease of use and less postoperative pain and complication Ligasure™ hemorrhoidectomy can be preformed as a day-care procedure.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Milligan ETC, Morgan CN, Jones LE, Officer R (1937) Surgical anatomy of the anal canal and the operative treatment of hemorrhoids. Lancet 2:1119–1124
Ferguson JA, Heaton JR (1959) Closed hemorrhoidectomy. Dis Colon Rectum 2:176–179
Engel AF, Eijsbouts QA (2000) Hemorrhoidectomy: painful choice. Lancet 355:2253–2254
Wang JY, Lu CY, Tsai HL, Chen FM, Huang CJ, Huang YS, Huang TJ, Hsieh JS (2006) Randomized controlled trial of Ligasure with submucosal dissection versus Ferguson hemorrhoidectomy for prolapsed hemorrhoids. World J Surg 30:462–466
Wang JY, Tsai HL, Chen FM, Chu KS, Chan HM, Huang CJ, Hsieh JS (2007) Prospective randomized controlled trial of Starion™ vs Ligasure™ hemorrhoidectomy for prolapsed hemorrhoids. Dis Colon Rectum 50:1146–1151
Sayfan J, Becker A, Koltan L (2001) Sutureless closed hemorrhoidectomy: a new technique. Ann Surg 234(1):21–24
Kwok SY, Chung CC, Tsui KK, Li MKW (2005) A double—blind randomized trial comparing Ligasure™ and Harmonic Scalpel™ hemorrhoidectomy. Dis Colon Rectum 48(2):344–348
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Khanna, R., Khanna, S., Bhadani, S. et al. Comparison of Ligasure Hemorrhoidectomy with Conventional Ferguson’s Hemorrhoidectomy. Indian J Surg 72, 294–297 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12262-010-0192-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12262-010-0192-3