Poređenje hemoroidektomije laserom i hemoroidektomije metodom Milligan-Morgan – kratkoročni rezultati

Halit  Maloku; Ranko  Lazović; Hasime  Terziqi

doi:10.2298/VSP170125070M

Halit Maloku PhD Studies, Faculty of Medicine, University of Montenegro
Ranko Lazović University of Montenegro, Faculty of Medicine, PhD Studies, Podgorica, Montenegro
Hasime Terziqi Multi-Profile University Hospital for Active Medical Treatment and Emergency Medicine (UMHATEM), “N. I. PIROGOV”, PhD study, Sofia, Bulgaria

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2298/VSP170125070M

Ključne reči: hemorrhoids, laser therapy, surgical procedures, operative, postoperative period, postoperative complications.

Sažetak

Abstract

Background/Aim. According to the “vascular” theory, arterial inflow into the upper hemorrhoidal artery leads to venous dilatation of the hemorrhoidal plexus. Laser hemorrhoidoplasty (LHP) is a new treatment applied to outpatients in whom the hemorrhoid arterial blood flow is coagulated (nourishes by hemorrhoidal plexus) by laser. The aim of this study was to compare two groups of patients treated by two different methods: by laser (LHP) and with open surgical procedure – the Milligan Morgan (MM) method. Methods. This study included 200 patients with grade 3 hemorrhoidal disease older than 18 years, divided into two groups: 100 patients treated with the LHP, while the other 100 patients with the MM hemorrhoidectomy. Parameters used to compare two applied surgical methods were: duration of hospitalization, postoperative pain, the presence of bleeding and time needed to return to normal life. Results. The results reveal a statistically significant difference between these two methods. The level of postoperative pain was lower in the group of patients treated with the LHP compared to the group of patients treated with the MM method (p < 0.0001). The group treated with the LHP manifested less bleeding in comparison with the group treated with the open surgical method (MM). Length of hospitalization and duration of surgery were significantly shorter in the group treated with the LHP method than in the group treated by the MM method. Conclusion. According to our results, it is clear that the LHP method has many advantages over the MM hemorrhoidectomy in patients with grade 3 hemorrhoidal disease.

Reference

REFERENCES

Johanson JF, Sonnenberg A. The prevalence of hemorrhoids and chronic constipation. An epidemiologic study. Gastro¬ente¬ro-logy 1990; 98(2): 380–6.

Rogozina VA. Hemorrhoids. Eksp Klin Gastroenterol 2002; (4): 93–6, 134. (Russian)

Plapler H, Hage R, Duarte J, Lopes N, Masson I, Cazarini C, et al. A new method for hemorrhoid surgery: intrahemorrhoidal di¬ode laser, does it work? Photomed Laser Surg 2009; 27(5): 819–23.

Parks AG. De haemorrhois; a study in surgical history. Guys Hosp Rep 1955; 104(2): 135–56.

Keighley MR, Williams NS. Surgery of the anus, rectum and co-lon. London: WB Saunders; 1999.

Haas PA, Fox TA Jr, Haas GP. The pathogenesis of hemorrho-ids. Dis Colon Rectum 1984; 27(7): 442–50.

Thomson WH. The nature of haemorrhoids. Br J Surg 1975; 62(7): 542–52.

MacRae HM, McLeod RS. Comparison of hemorrhoidal treat-ment modalities. A meta-analysis. Di. Colon Rectum 1995; 38(7): 687–94.

Monson JRT, Mortenson NJ, Hartley J. Procedures for Prolapsing Hemorrhoids (PPH) or Stapled Anopexy. Consensus Docu-ment for Association of Coloproctology of Great Britain and Ireland. ACPGBI; 2003.

Bleday R, Pena JP, Rothenberger DA, Goldberg SM, Buls JG. Symptomatic hemorrhoids: Current incidence and complicati-ons of operative therapy. Dis Colon Rectum 1992; 35(5): 477–81.

Sardinha CT, Corman ML. Hemorrhoids. Surg. Clin North Am 2002; 82(6): 1153–67, vi.

Goligher J, Duthie H, Nixon H. Surgery of the anus rectum and colon. 5th ed. London: Baillière Tindall; 1984.

Salfi R. A new technique for ambulantory hemorrhoidal treat-ment. Doppler-guided laser photocoagulation of hemorrhoidal arteries. Coloproctology 2009; 31(2): 99–103.

Chia YW, Darzi A, Speakman CT, Hill AD, Jameson JS, Henry MM. CO2 laser haemorrhoidectomy--does it alter anorectal function or decrease pain compared to conventional haemor-rhoidectomy? Int J Colorectal Dis 1995; 10(1): 22–4.

Barcly L. Best option for evaluating and treating hemorrhoids. BMJ 2008; 336: 380–3.

Crea N, Pata G, Lippa M, Chiesa D, Gregorini ME, Gandolfi P. He¬morrhoidal laser procedure: short- and long-term results from a prospective study. Am J Surg 2014; 208(1): 21–5.

Naderan M, Shoar S, Nazari M, Elsayed A, Mahmoodzadeh H, Khor¬gami Z. A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Laser Intra-Hemorrhoidal Coagulation and Milligan-Morgan Hemorrhoidectomy. J Invest Surg 2016; 2: 1–7.

Leardi S, Pessia B, Mascio M, Piccione F, Schietroma M, Pietroletti R.Doppler-Guided Transanal Hemorrhoidal Dearterialization (DG-THD) Versus Stapled Hemorrhoidopexy (SH) in the Treatment of Third-Degree Hemorrhoids: Clinical Results at Short and Long-Term Follow-Up. J Gastrointest Surg 2016; 20(11): 1886–90.

Milligan ET, Morgan CN, Jones LE, Officer R. Surgical anatomy of the anal canal and the operative treatment of hemorrhoids. Lancet 1937; 2: 1119–24.

Voigtsberger A, Popovicova L, Bauer G, Werner K, Weitschat-Benser T, Petersen S. Stapled hemorrhoidopexy: functional results, re-currence rate, and prognosticfactors in a single center analysis. Int J Colorectal Dis 2016; 31(1): 35–9.

LaBella GD, Main WP, Hussain LR. Evaluation of transanal he¬morrhoidal dearterialization: A single surgeon experience. Tech Coloproctol 2015; 19(3): 153–7.

De Nardi P, Tamburini AM, Gazzetta PG, Lemma M, Pascariello A, Asteria CR. Hemorrhoid laser procedure for second- and third-degree hemorrhoids: Results from a multicenter pro-spective study. Tech Coloproctol 2016; 20(7): 455–9.

Sammarco G, Ferrari F, Carpino A, Russo E, Vescio G, Ammendola M, et al. PPH vs Milligan-Morgan: Early and late complicati¬ons in the treatment of haemorrhoidal disease with circumfe¬rential prolapse. Ann Ital Chir 2014; 85(5): 464–.

Majeed S, Naqvi SR, Tariq M, Ali MA.Comparison of Open and Closed Techniques of Haemorrhoidectomy in Terms of Post-Operative Complications. J Ayub Med Coll Abbottabad 2015; 27(4): 791–3.

Avital S, Itah R, Skornick Y, Greenberg R. Outcome of stapled he¬morrhoidopexy versus doppler-guided hemorrhoidal artery ligation for grade III hemorrhoids. Tech Coloproctol 2011; 15(3): 267–71.

Gain Yu M. Laser Tecnologies in Complex Tretmant of Hemo¬rrhoids. Novosti Khirurgii 2013; 21(1): 94–104.

Denoya P, Tam J, Bergamaschi R. Hemorrhoidal dearterialization with mucopexy versus hemorrhoidectomy: 3-year follow-up assessment of a randomized controlled trial. Tech Coloproctol 2014; 18(11): 1081–5.

Gemici K, Okuş A, Serden A. Vascular Z-shaped ligation techni¬que in surgical treatment of haemorrhoid. World J Gastroin¬test Surg 2015; 7(1): 10–4.

Laser hemorrhoidoplasty versus Milligan-Morgan hemorrhoidectomy – short-term outcome

Sažetak

Reference