Advertisement

Hemorrhoids pp 395-403 | Cite as

Pros and Contras of Dearterialization of Hemorrhoids and Mucopexy

  • Fábio Guilherme Campos
  • Marleny Novaes Figueiredo
  • Carlos Augusto Real Martinez
Reference work entry
Part of the Coloproctology book series (COLOPROCT, volume 2)

Abstract

Management of hemorrhoidal disease is a tough task. First of all, because more than one surgical technique may be adequately indicated to manage different patients. Secondly, patients desire a good option associated with less postoperative pain, low morbidity, and good long-term results. In this setting, conventional excision of hemorrhoids is highly effective, besides being associated with postoperative pain and discomfort. For this reason, nonexcisional alternatives have been developed in order to reduce complications and to provide better postoperative recovery. To accomplish this aim, the Doppler-guided hemorrhoidal dearterialization with anopexy was been introduced into clinical practice with high expectations. This hope has been maintained mainly for the encouraging early results, and despite the possibility of late prolapse recurrence, especially in grade IV disease. Anatomical and clinical studies have demonstrated the THD efficacy in controlling symptoms and ameliorating quality of life. As it preserves anatomy, it causes no detrimental effect on the anorectal physiology, making functional disturbances mainly transitory and rarely observed. Consequently, this technique may be an excellent option for patients with previous anal surgery and defecatory problems, when an additional procedure might increment this risk and affect quality of life. Furthermore, the THD technique has not been associated with frequent postoperative morbidity, life-threatening complications nor severe sequelae.

Keywords

Hemorrhoids Transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization Surgical treatment Recurrence Stapled hemorrhoidopexy Hemorrhoidectomy 

References

  1. Aigner F, Bonatti H, Peer S et al (2010) Vascular considerations for stapled haemorrhoidopexy. Color Dis 12:452–458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Atallah S, Maharaja GK, Martin-Perez B, Burke JP, Albert MR, Larach SW (2016) Transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization (THD): a safe procedure for the anticoagulated patient? Tech Coloproctol 20:461–466CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. Avital S, Itah R, Skornick Y, Greenberg R (2011) Outcome of stapled hemorrhoidopexy versus doppler-guided hemorrhoidal artery ligation for grade III hemorrhoids. Tech Coloproctol 15(3):267–271CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Avital S, Inbar R, Karin E, Greenberg R (2012a) Five-year follow-up of Doppler-guided hemorrhoidal artery ligation. Tech Coloproctol 16:61–65CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Avital S, Inbar R, Karin E, Greenberg R (2012b) Five-year follow-up of Doppler-guided hemorrhoidal artery ligation. Tech Coloproctol 16(1):61–65CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Béliard A, Labbé F, de Faucal D, Fabreguette JM, Pouderoux P, Borie F (2014) A prospective and comparative study between stapled hemorrhoidopexy and hemorrhoidal artery ligation with mucopexy. J Visc Surg 151(4):257–262CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Bursics A, Morvay K, Kupcsulik P, Flautner L (2004) Comparison of early and 1-year follow-up results of conventional hemorrhoidectomy and hemorrhoid artery ligation: a randomized study. Int J Color Dis 19(2):176–180CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Chauhan A, Thomas S, Bishnoi PK, Hadke NS (2007) Randomized controlled trial to assess the role of raised anal pressures in the pathogenesis of symptomatic early hemorrhoids. Dig Surg 24(1):28–32CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Conaghan P, Farouk R (2009) Doppler-guided hemorrhoid artery ligation reduces the need for conventional hemorrhoid surgery in patients who fail rubber band ligation treatment. Dis Colon Rectum 52(1):127–130CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Dal Monte PP, Tagariello C, Sarago M et al (2007) Transanal haemorrhoidal dearterialisation: nonexcisional surgery for the treatment of haemorrhoidal disease. Tech Coloproctol 11:333–338CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Denoya P, Tam J, Bergamaschi R (2014a) Hemorrhoidal dearterialization with mucopexy versus hemorrhoidectomy: 3-year follow-up assessment of a randomized controlled trial. Tech Coloproctol 18(11):1081–1085CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. Denoya P, Tam J, Bergamaschi R (2014b) Hemorrhoidal dearterialization with mucopexy versus hemorrhoidectomy: 3-year follow-up assessment of a randomized controlled trial. Tech Coloproctol 18(11):1081–1085CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. Elmér SE, Nygren JO, Lenander CE (2013) A randomized trial of transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization with anopexy compared with open hemorrhoidectomy in the treatment of hemorrhoids. Dis Colon Rectum 56(4):484–490CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Faucheron JL, Poncet G, Voirin D, Badic B, Gangner Y (2011) Doppler-guided hemorrhoidal artery ligation and rectoanal repair (HAL-RAR) for the treatment of grade IV hemorrhoids: long-term results in 100 consecutive patients. Dis Colon Rectum 54(2):226–231CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Faucheron JL, Voirin D, Abba J (2012) Rectal perforation with life-threatening peritonitis following stapled haemorrhoidopexy. Br J Surg 99(6):746–753CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Festen S, van Hoogstraten MJ, van Geloven AA, Gerhards MF (2009) Treatment of grade III and IV haemorrhoidal disease with PPH or THD. A randomized trial on postoperative complications and short-term results. Int J Color Dis 24(12):1401–1405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Figueiredo MN, Campos FG (2016) Doppler-guided hemorrhoidal dearterialization/transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization: technical evolution and outcomes after 20 years. World J Gastrointest Surg 8(3):232–237CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. Giamundo P (2016) Advantages and limits of hemorrhoidal dearterialization in the treatment of symptomatic hemorrhoids. World J Gastrointest Surg 8(1):1–4CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. Giordano P, Overton J, Madeddu F, Zaman S, Gravante G (2009) Transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization: a systematic review. Dis Colon Rectum 52(9):1665–1671CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Giordano P, Nastro P, Davies A, Gravante G (2011) Prospective evaluation of stapled haemorrhoidopexy versus transanal haemorrhoidal dearterialisation for stage II and III haemorrhoids: three-year outcomes. Tech Coloproctol 15(1):67–73CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. Giordano P, Tomasi I, Pascariello A, Mills E, Elahi S (2014) Transanal dearterialization with targeted mucopexy is effective for advanced haemorrhoids. Color Dis 16(5):373–376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gupta PJ, Kalaskar S, Taori S, Heda PS (2011) Doppler-guided hemorrhoidal artery ligation does not offer any advantage over suture ligation of grade 3 symptomatic hemorrhoids. Tech Coloproctol 15:439–444CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Hiltunen KM, Matikainen M (1985) Anal manometric findings in symptomatic hemorrhoids. Dis Colon Rectum 28(11):807–809CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Hussein AM (2001) Ligation-anopexy for treatment of advanced hemorrhoidal disease. Dis Colon Rectum 44(12):1887–1890CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Infantino A, Bellomo R, Dal Monte PP, Salafia C, Tagariello C, Tonizzo CA et al (2010) Transanal haemorrhoidal artery echodoppler ligation and anopexy (THD) is effective for II and III degree haemorrhoids: a prospective multicentric study. Color Dis 12(8):804–809CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 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 50:1297–1305CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Khafagy W, El Nakeeb A, Fouda E et al (2009) Conventional haemorrhoidectomy, stapled haemorrhoidectomy, Doppler guided haemorrhoidectomy artery ligation; post operative pain and anorectal manometric assessment. Hepato-Gastroenterology 56:1010–1015PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. LaBella GD, Main WP, Hussain LR (2015) Evaluation of transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization: a single surgeon experience. Tech Coloproctol 19(3):153–157CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. Liu H, Yang C, Chen B, Wu J, He H (2015) Clinical outcomes of Doppler-guided haemorrhoidal artery ligation: a meta-analysis. Int J Clin Exp Med 8(4):4932–4939PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. Lucarelli P, Picchio M, Caporossi M, De Angelis F, Di Filippo A, Stipa F et al (2013) Transanal haemorrhoidal dearterialisation with mucopexy versus stapler haemorrhoidopexy: a randomised trial with long-term follow-up. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 95(4):246–251CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. Lucha PA (2009) Pathophysiology of hemorrhoidal disease. In: Khubchandani I, Paonessa N, Azimuddin K (eds) Surgical treatment of hemorrhoids. Springer, London, pp 15–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Morinaga K, Hasuda K, Ikeda T (1995) A novel therapy for internal hemorrhoids: ligation of the hemorrhoidal artery with a newly devised instrument (Moricorn) in conjunction with a Doppler flowmeter. Am J Gastroenterol 90(4):610–613PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. Ortiz H, Marzo J, Armenda’riz P, De Miguel M (2005) Stapled hemorrhoidopexy vs. diathermy excision for fourth-degree hemorrhoids: a randomized, clinical trial and review of the literature. Dis Colon Rectum 48:809–815CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Patti R, Almasio PL, Arcara M, Sparacello M, Termine S, Bonventre S et al (2007) Long-term manometric study of anal sphincter function after hemorrhoidectomy. Int J Color Dis 22(3):253–257CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Poylin V (2016) Anal physiology: the physiology of continence and defecation. In: Steele SR, Hull TL, Read TE, Saclarides TJ, Senagore AJ, Whitlow CB (eds) The ASCRS textbook of colon and rectal surgery, 3rd edn. Springer, New York, pp 37–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Ratto C (2014) THD Doppler procedure for hemorrhoids: the surgical technique. Tech Coloproctol 18(3):291–298CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Ratto C, de Parades V (2015) Doppler-guided ligation of hemorrhoidal arteries with mucopexy: a technique for the future. J Visc Surg 152(2 Suppl):S15–S21CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Ratto C, Donisi L, Parello A, Litta F, Doglietto GB (2010) Evaluation of transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization as a minimally invasive therapeutic approach to hemorrhoids. Dis Colon Rectum 53(5):803–811CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Ratto C, Parello A, Donisi L, Litta F, Doglietto GB (2011a) Anorectal physiology is not changed following transanal haemorrhoidal dearterialization for haemorrhoidal disease: clinical, manometric and endosonographic features. Color Dis 13(8):e243–e245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Ratto C, Giordano P, Donisi L, Parello A, Litta F, Doglietto GB (2011b) Transanal haemorrhoidal dearterialization (THD) for selected fourth-degree haemorrhoids. Tech Coloproctol 15(2):191–197CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Ratto C, Parello A, Donisi L, Litta F, Zaccone G, Doglietto GB (2012) Assessment of haemorrhoidal artery network using colour duplex imaging and clinical implications. Br J Surg 99:112–118CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Ratto C, Parello A, Veronese E, Cudazzo E, D'Agostino E, Pagano C et al (2015a) Doppler-guided transanal haemorrhoidal dearterialization for haemorrhoids: results from a multicentre trial. Color Dis 17(1):O10–O19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Ratto C, Parello A, Veronese E, Cudazzo E, D'Agostino E, Pagano C, Cavazzoni E, Brugnano L, Litta F (2015b) Doppler-guided transanal haemorrhoidal dearterialization for haemorrhoids: results from a multicentre trial. Color Dis 17(1):O10–O19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sajid MS, Parampalli U, Whitehouse P, Sains P, McFall MR, Baig MK (2012) A systematic review comparing transanal haemorrhoidal de-arterialisation to stapled haemorrhoidopexy in the management of haemorrhoidal disease. Tech Coloproctol 16(1):1–8CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Satzinger U, Feil W, Glaser K (2009) Recto anal repair (RAR): a viable new treatment option for high-grade hemorrhoids. One year results of a prospective study. Pelviperineology 28:37–42Google Scholar
  46. Scheyer M, Antonietti E, Rollinger G, Mall H, Arnold S (2006) Doppler-guided hemorrhoidal artery ligation. Am J Surg 191(1):89–93CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Simillis C, Thoukididou SN, Slesser AA, Rasheed S, Tan E, Tekkis PP (2015) Systematic review and network meta-analysis comparing clinical outcomes and effectiveness of surgical treatments for haemorrhoids. Br J Surg 102(13):1603–1618CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Theodoropoulos GE, Sevrisarianos N, Papaconstantinou J, Panoussopoulos SG, Dardamanis D, Stamopoulos P et al (2010) Doppler-guided haemorrhoidal artery ligation, rectoanal repair, sutured haemorrhoidopexy and minimal mucocutaneous excision for grades III-IV haemorrhoids: a multicenter prospective study of safety and efficacy. Color Dis 12(2):125–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Tsang YP, Fok KL, Cheung YS, Li KW, Tang CN (2014) Comparison of transanal haemorrhoidal dearterialisation and stapled haemorrhoidopexy in management of haemorrhoidal disease: a retrospective study and literature review. Tech Coloproctol 18(11):1017–1022CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Verre L, Rossi R, Gaggelli I, Di Bella C, Tirone A, Piccolomini A (2013) PPH versus THD: a comparison of two techniques for III and IV degree haemorrhoids. Personal experience. Minerva Chir 68(6):543–550PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Walega P, Romaniszyn M, Kenig J, Herman R, Nowak W (2012) Doppler-guided hemorrhoid artery ligation with recto-anal-repair modification: functional evaluation and safety assessment of a new minimally invasive method of treatment of advanced hemorrhoidal disease. Sci World J 2012:324040CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Wilkerson PM, Strbac M, Reece-Smith H, Middleton SB (2009) Doppler-guided haemorrhoidal artery ligation: long-term outcome and patient satisfaction. Color Dis 11(4):394–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Xu L, Chen H, Lin G, Ge Q, Qi H, He X (2016) Transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization with mucopexy versus open hemorrhoidectomy in the treatment of hemorrhoids: a meta-analysis of randomized control trials. Tech Coloproctol 20:825–833. [Epub ahead of print]CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fábio Guilherme Campos
    • 1
  • Marleny Novaes Figueiredo
    • 2
  • Carlos Augusto Real Martinez
    • 3
  1. 1.Colorectal Surgery Division, Gastroenterology DepartmentHospital das Clínicas, University of São PauloSão PauloBrazil
  2. 2.Gastroenterology DepartmentHospital das Clínicas, University of São PauloSão PauloBrazil
  3. 3.Colorectal Surgery DivisionUniversity of CampinasSão PauloBrazil

Personalised recommendations