Advertisement

Hemorrhoids pp 411-414 | Cite as

Main Disadvantages of Dearterialization of Hemorrhoids and Mucopexy

  • Felix Aigner
Reference work entry
Part of the Coloproctology book series (COLOPROCT, volume 2)

Abstract

Ligation techniques, such as Doppler-guided dearterialization of hemorrhoids (DH), were introduced to reduce the arterial inflow to the hemorrhoidal zone and thus preserve it as part of the continence system. Apart from inappropriate application of this surgical alternative for higher grade hemorrhoids, high recurrence rates of up to 30% after DH are due to technical failure of the ligation technique itself. Doppler-guided ligations can be set too high above the hemorrhoidal zone, missing the targeted submucosal branches of the superior rectal artery. However, prolapsing hemorrhoids have been proposed to be insufficiently treated by solely interrupting the arterial inflow without repositioning the hemorrhoidal zone by mucopexy in DH. To overcome the shortcomings of the DG-HAL procedure, suture ligation modifications have been made, which address the pexy of the hemorrhoidal prolapse by fixing it above the dentate line.

References

  1. Aigner F, Bodner G, Conrad F, Mbaka G, Kreczy A, Fritsch H (2004) The superior rectal artery and its branching pattern with regard to its clinical influence on ligation techniques for internal hemorrhoids. Am J Surg 187(1):102–108CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Aigner F, Kronberger I, Oberwalder M, Loizides A, Ulmer H, Gruber L, Pratschke J, Peer S, Gruber H (2016) Doppler-guided haemorrhoidal artery ligation with suture mucopexy compared with suture mucopexy alone for the treatment of grade III haemorrhoids: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Color Dis 18(7):710–716.  https://doi.org/10.1111/codi.13280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Giordano P, Overton J, Madeddu F, Zaman S, Gravante G (2009) Transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization: a systematic review. Dis Colon Rectum 52(9):1665–1671.  https://doi.org/10.1007/DCR.0b013e3181af50f4CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. Gupta PJ, Kalaskar S (2008) Ligation and mucopexy for prolapsing hemorrhoids – a ten year experience. Ann Surg Innov Res 2:5.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1750-1164-2-5CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 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(4):439–444.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-011-0780-7CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 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
  7. Pucher PH, Sodergren MH, Lord AC, Darzi A, Ziprin P (2013) Clinical outcome following Doppler-guided haemorrhoidal artery ligation: a systematic review. Color Dis 15(6):e284–e294.  https://doi.org/10.1111/codi.12205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ratto C, de Parades V (2015) Doppler-guided ligation of hemorrhoidal arteries with mucopexy: a technique for the future. J Visc Surg 152(Suppl 2):S15–S21.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jviscsurg.2014.08.003CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 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(1):112–118.  https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.7700CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. Scheyer M, Antonietti E, Rollinger G, Lancee S, Pokorny H (2015) Hemorrhoidal artery ligation (HAL) and rectoanal repair (RAR): retrospective analysis of 408 patients in a single center. Tech Coloproctol 19(1):5–9.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-014-1246-5CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 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):1603–1618.  https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.9913CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. Trompetto M, Clerico G, Cocorullo GF, Giordano P, Marino F, Martellucci J, Milito G, Mistrangelo M, Ratto C (2015) Evaluation and management of hemorrhoids: Italian society of colorectal surgery (SICCR) consensus statement. Tech Coloproctol 19(10):567–575.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10151-015-1371-9CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of SurgeryCharité Universitätsmedizin, Campus Virchow-Klinikum and MitteBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations