Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

Results of the double-blind randomized controlled trial comparing laser hemorrhoidoplasty with sutured mucopexy and excisional hemorrhoidectomy

View through CrossRef
Abstract Purpose To compare the results of laser hemorrhoidoplasty (LHP), excisional hemorrhoidectomy (EH), and sutured mucopexy (MP). Methods A randomized, parallel-group, double-blinded, single-center prospective study. Patients Symptomatic 2nd- or 3rd-degree hemorrhoids patients. Interventions Computer randomization sequence, patient blinding, operating surgeon blinding, and surgeon-evaluator blinding. LHP was performed using a 1470 nm diode laser. Up to 250 J of energy delivered per 1 hemorrhoid. The procedure was performed circumferentially. MP ligations were placed in the area of visible hemorrhoidal tissue. Standard EH was performed up to the level of the hemorrhoidal pedicle. Follow-up at 1 and 6 weeks and 1 year. Outcome measures Recurrence of symptoms requiring treatment, intensity, and duration of pain after the operation, patients’ quality of life, fecal incontinence, and patients’ evaluation of treatment. Results A total of 121 patients. Groups were even preoperatively. LHP took 15 min (SD 5.6), MP took 16 min (SD 5.58), and EH took 29 min (SD 10.3). Recurrence requiring treatment rate was 0% after EH, 10% after LHP, and 22% after MP, p = 0.004. LHP and MP were less painful than EH, p < 0.001. Patients after LHP returned to regular activity after 15 days, after MP after 22 days, and after EH after 30 days, p < 0.001. SF-36 scores were better after EH. Symptoms of fecal incontinence improved in all the groups. Patients evaluate LHP better than EH and MP. Limitations Single-center study. Conclusions Laser hemorrhoidoplasty is a safe, minimally invasive option for hemorrhoids, more effective than MP and less effective than EH. Patients evaluate this technique better than the other two.
Title: Results of the double-blind randomized controlled trial comparing laser hemorrhoidoplasty with sutured mucopexy and excisional hemorrhoidectomy
Description:
Abstract Purpose To compare the results of laser hemorrhoidoplasty (LHP), excisional hemorrhoidectomy (EH), and sutured mucopexy (MP).
Methods A randomized, parallel-group, double-blinded, single-center prospective study.
Patients Symptomatic 2nd- or 3rd-degree hemorrhoids patients.
Interventions Computer randomization sequence, patient blinding, operating surgeon blinding, and surgeon-evaluator blinding.
LHP was performed using a 1470 nm diode laser.
Up to 250 J of energy delivered per 1 hemorrhoid.
The procedure was performed circumferentially.
MP ligations were placed in the area of visible hemorrhoidal tissue.
Standard EH was performed up to the level of the hemorrhoidal pedicle.
Follow-up at 1 and 6 weeks and 1 year.
Outcome measures Recurrence of symptoms requiring treatment, intensity, and duration of pain after the operation, patients’ quality of life, fecal incontinence, and patients’ evaluation of treatment.
Results A total of 121 patients.
Groups were even preoperatively.
LHP took 15 min (SD 5.
6), MP took 16 min (SD 5.
58), and EH took 29 min (SD 10.
3).
Recurrence requiring treatment rate was 0% after EH, 10% after LHP, and 22% after MP, p = 0.
004.
LHP and MP were less painful than EH, p < 0.
001.
Patients after LHP returned to regular activity after 15 days, after MP after 22 days, and after EH after 30 days, p < 0.
001.
SF-36 scores were better after EH.
Symptoms of fecal incontinence improved in all the groups.
Patients evaluate LHP better than EH and MP.
Limitations Single-center study.
Conclusions Laser hemorrhoidoplasty is a safe, minimally invasive option for hemorrhoids, more effective than MP and less effective than EH.
Patients evaluate this technique better than the other two.

Related Results

Cause of Early Failure of Laser Hemorrhoidoplasty with Mucopexy in 3rd and 4th Degree Hemorrhoids at Shifa Hospital Saidu Sharif Swat
Cause of Early Failure of Laser Hemorrhoidoplasty with Mucopexy in 3rd and 4th Degree Hemorrhoids at Shifa Hospital Saidu Sharif Swat
Purpose of Study: Common surgical approaches in the management of hemorrhoid disease such as standard Milligan Morgan hemorrhoidectomies are with severe postoperative pain and long...
Safety and Efficacy of Atezolizumab in Ovarian Cancer
Safety and Efficacy of Atezolizumab in Ovarian Cancer
Abstract Introduction Although the efficacy of PD-L1 blockade has been evaluated in analyses that combine pharmacologically distinct antibodies, the specific efficacy and safety of...
Comparison of transanal Hemorrhoidopexy versus laser hemorrhoidoplasty with digital-guided hemorrhoidal artery ligation
Comparison of transanal Hemorrhoidopexy versus laser hemorrhoidoplasty with digital-guided hemorrhoidal artery ligation
Background: Hemorrhoids are a common proctological disease that affects the quality of life in the patient population to a great extent. Nearly 4.4–36% of population is affected by...
Comparison of transanal Hemorrhoidopexy versus laser hemorrhoidoplasty with digital-guided hemorrhoidal artery ligation
Comparison of transanal Hemorrhoidopexy versus laser hemorrhoidoplasty with digital-guided hemorrhoidal artery ligation
Background: Hemorrhoids are a common proctological disease that affects the quality of life in the patient population to a great extent. Nearly 4.4–36% of population is affected by...
A controlled trial comparing emergency hemorrhoidectomy versus conservative treatment for acutely thrombosed hemorrhoid
A controlled trial comparing emergency hemorrhoidectomy versus conservative treatment for acutely thrombosed hemorrhoid
Aim: Acutely thrombosed hemorrhoid is either treated conservatively or with emergency hemorrhoidectomy. The treatments have not been compared in a randomized controlled trial. We a...

Back to Top