Stapled Hemorrhoidopexy vs. Diathermy Excision for Fourth-Degree Hemorrhoids: A Randomized, Clinical Trial and Review of the Literature

PURPOSE The aim of this prospective study was to compare the results of stapled hemorrhoidopexy with those of conventional diathermy excision for controlling symptoms in patients with fourth-degree hemorrhoids.METHODS Thirty-one patients with symptomatic, prolapsed irreducible piles were randomized to either stapled hemorrhoidopexy (n = 15) or diathermy excision (n = 16). The primary outcome measure was the control of hemorrhoidal symptoms one year after operation.RESULTS The two procedures were comparable in terms of pain relief and disappearance of bleeding. Recurrent prolapse starting from the fourth month after operation was confirmed in 8 of 15 patients in the stapled group and in none in the diathermy excision group: two-tailed Fishers exact test P = 0.002, RR 0.33, 95 percent confidence interval 0.19–0.59). Five of these patients responded well to a later conventional diathermy hemorrhoidectomy. Persistence of itching was reported in six patients in the stapled group and in one of the diathermy excision group (P = 0.03). On the other hand, six patients in the stapled group and none in the diathermy excision group experienced tenesmus (P = 0.007).CONCLUSIONS Stapled hemorrhoidopexy was not effective as a definitive cure for the symptoms of prolapse and itching in patients with fourth-degree hemorrhoids. Moreover, stapled hemorrhoidopexy induced the appearance of a new symptom, tenesmus, in 40 percent of the patients. Therefore conventional diathermy hemorrhoidectomy should continue to be recommended in patients with symptomatic, prolapsed, irreducible piles.Presented at the meeting of The Spanish Association of Coloproctology, Baiona, Spain, April 28 to 30, 2004     

A Double-Blind, Randomized Trial Comparing LigasureTM and Harmonic ScalpelTM Hemorrhoidectomy

PURPOSE The major problem after hemorrhoidectomy is postoperative pain. New techniques have been evolved to circumvent this problem. The present study was conducted to compare the outcomes of Ligasure^TM hemorrhoidectomy and Harmonic Scalpel^TM hemorrhoidectomy.METHODS This study was a double-blind, randomized controlled trial. Patients with Grade 3 and 4 hemorrhoids admitted for hemorrhoidectomy were selected and randomized into two groups: 1) Ligasure^TM hemorrhoidectomy or 2) Harmonic Scalpel^TM hemorrhoidectomy. The primary outcomes measured were the analgesic requirement and the postoperative pain score (assessed by an independent assessor). Secondary outcome criteria included the operating time, blood loss, hospital stay, patient satisfaction score, and early and late complications.RESULTS Forty-nine patients were randomized into two groups (LigaSureT 24, Harmonic ScalpelT 25). Two patients were lost to follow-up, leaving 47 patients (LigaSureT 24, Harmonic ScalpelT 23) available for final analysis. The age and gender distribution were comparable. The postoperative pain score (median 2.6 vs. 4.8, P < 0.001) and postoperative oral analgesic (Dologesic^reg) requirement (median 5 vs. 13, P = 0.001) were significantly less in the LigaSureT group. The operating time (median 11 vs. 18 minutes, P < 0.001) was significantly less in the LigaSureT group. The hospital stay, patient satisfaction score, percentage of patients requiring pethidine injection, percentage of patients with first bowel movement on or before the first postoperative day, and complication rates were similar between the two groups.CONCLUSIONS Ligasure^TM hemorrhoidectomy reduces the postoperative pain and operating time compared to the Harmonic Scalpel^TM hemorrhoidectomy. It is a safe, effective procedure for treating Grade 3 and 4 hemorrhoidsThis work was presented at the Annual Scientific Meeting, Hong Kong Society of Coloproctology, Hong Kong, December 7, 2003.     

Stapled Technique for Acute Thrombosed Hemorrhoids: A Randomized,Controlled Trial with Long-Term Results

Purpose This study was designed to compare stapled vs. conventional hemorrhoidectomy for patients with acute thrombosed hemorrhoids. Methods Forty-one patients with acute thrombosed hemorrhoids were randomized into: 1) stapled hemorrhoidectomy (PPH group; n = 21), and 2) open hemorrhoidectomy (open group; n = 20). Emergency surgery was performed with perioperative data and complications were recorded. Patients were followed up by independent assessors to evaluate pain, recurrence, continence function, and satisfaction at regular intervals. Results The median follow-up for the PPH group and open group were 59 and 56 weeks, respectively. There was no significant difference in terms of the hospital stay, complication rate, and continence function; however, the mean pain intensity in the first postoperative week was significantly less in the PPH group (4.1 vs. 5.7, P = 0.02). Patients in the PPH group recovered significantly faster in terms of the time to become analgesic-free (4 vs. 8.5 days, P < 0.01), time to become pain-free (9 vs. 20.5 days, P = 0.01), resumption of work (7 vs. 12.5 days, P = 0.01), and time for complete wound healing (2 vs. 4 weeks, P < 0.01). On long-term follow-up, significantly fewer patients in the PPH group complained of recurrent symptoms (0 vs. 5, P = 0.02). The overall symptom improvement and patients’ satisfaction were significantly better in the PPH group (90 vs. 80 percent, P = 0.03 and +3 vs. +2, P < 0.01 respectively). Conclusions Stapled hemorrhoidectomy is safe and effective for acute thrombosed hemorrhoids. Similar to elective stapled procedure, emergency stapled excision has greater short-term benefits compared with conventional excision: diminished pain, faster recovery, and earlier return to work. Long-term results and satisfaction were excellent. Presented at the Annual Scientific Meeting of Hong Kong Society for Coloproctology, Hong Kong, January 14, 2006, at the Conjoined Annual Scientific Meeting of Royal College of Surgeon of Edinburg and The College of Surgeons of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, October 10 to 13, 2006, and at Annual Scientific Meeting of the Society of Endoscopic and Laparoscopic Surgeons of Asia, Seoul, Korea, October 18 to 21, 2006.     

A Prospective,Randomized, Controlled Multicenter Trial Comparing Stapled Hemorrhoidopexy and Ferguson Hemorrhoidectomy: Perioperative and One-Year Results

PURPOSE There is a growing body of evidence supporting the lesser degrees of pain with stapled hemorrhoidopexy, also called the procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids. However, there have been few randomized comparisons assessing both perioperative and long-term outcomes of the procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids and Ferguson hemorrhoidectomy. Results are presented here from the first prospective, randomized, multicenter trial comparing these hemorrhoid procedures in the United States.METHODS Patients with prolapsing hemorrhoids (Grade III) were randomized to undergo the procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids or Ferguson hemorrhoidectomy by colorectal surgeons who had training in using the stapling technique. Primary end points were acute postoperative pain, and hemorrhoid symptom recurrence requiring additional treatment at one-year follow-up from surgery.RESULTS A total of 156 patients (procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids, 77; Ferguson, 79) completed randomization and the surgical procedure, 18 (procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids, 12; Ferguson, 6) had significant protocol violations. One hundred seventeen patients (procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids, 59; Ferguson, 58) returned for one-year follow-up. Demographic parameters, hemorrhoid symptoms, preoperative pain scores, and bowel habits were similar between groups. There were a similar number of patients with adverse events in each group (procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids, 28 (36.4 percent) vs. Ferguson, 38 (48.1 percent); P = 0.138). Reoperation for an adverse effect was required in six (7.6 percent) Ferguson patients and in 0 patients having the procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids (P = 0.028). Postoperative pain during the first 14 days, pain at first bowel movement, and need for postoperative analgesics were significantly less in the procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids group. Control of hemorrhoid symptoms was similar between groups; however, significantly fewer patients having the procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids required additional anorectal procedures during one-year follow-up (procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids, 2 (2.6 percent), vs. Ferguson, 11 (13.9 percent); P = 0.01). Only four of the Ferguson patients (5 interventions) required additional procedures more than 30 days after surgery.CONCLUSIONS These data demonstrate that stapled hemorrhoidopexy offers the benefits of less postoperative pain, less requirement for analgesics, and less pain at first bowel movement, while providing similar control of symptoms and need for additional hemorrhoid treatment at one-year follow-up from surgery.Supported by Ethicon Endo-Surgery, Cincinnati, Ohio.Read at the meeting of The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons, Chicago, Illinois, June 3 to 8, 2002. Winner of The New England Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons Award.     

Mucosal Flap Excision for Treatment of Remnant Prolapsed Hemorrhoids or Skin Tags After Stapled Hemorrhoidopexy

Abstract Stapled hemorrhoidopexy may leave residual skin tags or external components following its use in large prolapsed piles. Excision of redundant mucosa above the dentate line and reconstitution to the staple line reduces these prolapsed elements. We describe a novel technique that removes residual skin tags and piles while remaining true to the spirit of stapled hemorrhoidopexy.     

Prospective, Randomized Trial Comparing Intraoperative Colonic Irrigation With Manual Decompression Only for Obstructed Left-Sided Colorectal Cancer

BACKGROUND This is a prospective, randomized, controlled trial comparing the outcome of intraoperative colonic irrigation with that of manual decompression for acutely obstructing colorectal cancers distal to the splenic flexure.METHODS All patients admitted to our department from June 1999 to August 2002 with obstructing left-sided colorectal cancers were recruited. Patients were randomized intraoperatively and were excluded if deemed unsuitable for segmental resection and primary anastomosis. Twenty-five patients were randomized to receive colonic irrigation and twenty-eight to receive manual decompression. Perioperative parameters and outcome including mortality and anastomotic leak were recorded.RESULTS Both groups of patients were comparable in terms of gender and age. The time taken for mobilization, decompression, and irrigation in the colonic irrigation group (median, 31 minutes) was significantly longer than that for the manual decompression group (median, 13 minutes) (P; = 0.0005). However, the total time of the operation was similar for both groups. Times for recovery of bowel function, of wound infection, and until discharge from the hospital were also similar. In the manual decompression group there were two cases of anastomotic leak (8 percent, 2/25) requiring reoperation but none (0/24) in the colonic irrigation group. However, this difference was not statistically significant.CONCLUSION Manual decompression of proximal colon without irrigation is as safe as colonic irrigation in one-stage surgical management of obstructing left-sided colorectal cancer.Published online: 28 January 2005.     

Topical Metronidazole (10 Percent) Decreases Posthemorrhoidectomy Pain and Improves Healing

INTRODUCTION Oral metronidazole has been previously demonstrated to decrease postoperative pain after open diathermy hemorrhoidectomy. The current study investigates the efficacy of topical metronidazole (10 percent) in reducing postoperative pain and promoting wound healing after Harmonic Scalpel^® hemorrhoidectomy.METHODS A prospective, randomized trial was conducted to compare posthemorrhoidectomy pain and wound healing with use of topical metronidazole (10 percent) vs. placebo carrier, applied to the surgical site. Surgical indications included grade 3 or 4 internal or external hemorrhoidal disease, with or without a fissure-in-ano. Pain was assessed using a visual analog score (VAS) preoperatively and on postoperative days 1, 2, 7, 14, and 28. Twenty-four-hour narcotic use (hydrocodone 10 mg) was recorded on postoperative days 1, 2, 7, 14, and 28. Digital photographs of the surgical site were taken at 14 days postoperatively. The photographs were independently ranked by three blinded observers according to a) postoperative edema, b) primary vs. secondary healing, and c) overall wound healing.RESULTS Twenty patients were randomized in a prospective manner, ten to the topical 10 percent metronidazole group and ten to the placebo carrier group. Patients in the topical metronidazole group experienced significantly less postoperative pain at day 7 (VAS ± SEM, 3.4 ± 0.4 vs. 6.3 ± 0.5; P = 0.002) and day 14 (1.0 ± 0.4 vs. 3.2 ± 0.7, P = 0.02). There was no statistical difference in narcotic analgesic requirements between groups. In the metronidazole group, postoperative edema was ranked significantly lower (mean score, 3.0 vs. 7.0, P < 0.01) and overall wound healing ranked significantly better (4.0 vs. 7.0, P = 0.03) than in controls.CONCLUSION Topical 10 percent metronidazole significantly reduces posthemorrhoidectomy discomfort at days 7 and 14 postoperatively. Postoperative edema is reduced and overall healing is improved, compared with that of carrier controls.     

A Prospective, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Retinol Palmitate (Vitamin A) for Symptomatic Chronic Radiation Proctopathy

PURPOSE This study was designed to determine whether oral retinol palmitate (vitamin A) can reduce the symptoms of radiation proctopathy.METHODS A randomized, double-blind trial comparing retinol palmitate (10,000 IU by mouth for 90 days) to placebo was conducted. Eligible patients were more than six months postpelvic radiotherapy and had significant symptoms as measured with the Radiation Proctopathy System Assessments Scale. Nineteen patients were randomized in total: ten to retinol palmitate and nine to placebo. The Radiation Proctopathy System Assessments Scale scores before and every 30 days for 90 days were measured. Five placebo nonresponders were crossed over to the retinol palmitate for another 90 days. Response was defined as a reduction in two or more symptoms by at least two Radiation Proctopathy System Assessments Scale points.RESULTS Seven of ten retinol palmitate patients responded, whereas two of nine responded to placebo (P = 0.057). Mean pre-post-treatment change in Radiation Proctopathy System Assessments Scale ( Radiation Proctopathy System Assessments Scale) in the retinol palmitate group was 11 ± 5, whereas Radiation Proctopathy System Assessments Scale in the placebo group was 2.5 ± 3.6 (P = 0.013, Mann-Whitney U test). Additionally, all five placebo nonresponders who were crossed over to treatment with retinal palmitate responded to treatment.CONCLUSIONS In our trial, retinol palmitate significantly reduced rectal symptoms of radiation proctopathy, perhaps because of wound-healing effects. The current results can serve as the foundation for future trials examining retinol palmitate in the multi-institutional setting.Supported in part by a private grant from Arthur C. Nielsen, Jr.     

Botulinum Toxin vs. Topical Glyceryl Trinitrate Ointment for Pain Control in Patients Undergoing Hemorrhoidectomy: A Randomized Trial

Purpose The maximum resting pressure in the anal canal is greatly raised after hemorrhoidectomy. This increase is likely to be the cause of postoperative pain, which is still the most troublesome early problem after hemorrhoidectomy. This study was designed to compare, after hemorrhoidectomy, the effects of intrasphincter injection of botulinum toxin vs. application of glyceryl trinitrate ointment in improving wound healing and reducing postoperative pain at rest or during defecation. Methods Thirty patients with hemorrhoids of third and fourth degree were included in the study and randomized in two groups. Anorectal manometry was performed preoperatively and 5 and 40 days after hemorrhoidectomy. One group received one injection containing 20 IU of botulinum toxin, whereas the other an application of 300 mg of 0.2 percent glyceryl trinitrate ointment three times daily for 30 days. Results Five days after hemorrhoidectomy, maximum resting pressure was significantly reduced compared with baseline values in both groups (85 ± 15 vs. 68 ± 11 mmHg for the group treated with botulinum toxin, 87 ± 11 vs. 78 ± 11 mmHg for the group treated with glyceryl trinitrate ointment). Overall analysis of postoperative pain at rest showed a significant reduction in the botulinum toxin group vs. glyceryl trinitrate group, whereas pain during defecation and time of healing were similar. Adverse effects, such as headaches, were observed only in the glyceryl trinitrate group. Forty days after hemorrhoidectomy in the glyceryl trinitrate group, maximum resting pressure values were similar to preoperative ones, whereas the values were still reduced in the botulinum toxin group. Conclusions A single intrasphincter injection of botulinum toxin was more effective and safer than repeated applications of glyceryl trinitrate in reducing early postoperative pain at rest but not during defecation. Supported by Ministero dell’Università e della Ricerca Scientifica e Tecnologica (MURST), grants 2003–04. An erratum to this article is available at .     

Prospective, randomized trial comparing pain and complications between diathermy and scissors for closed hemorrhoidectomy

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to assess pain and complication rates after closed hemorrhoidectomy with the use of either scissors or diathermy excision. METHODS: Ninety-one consecutive patients were prospectively randomly assigned by use of sealed envelopes to Group A (diathermy dissection; n=44) or Group B (scissors dissection; n=47). The resulting hemorrhoidal pedicle after hemorrhoidal dissection was transfixed and buried under the mucosa, which was closed with 3–0 chromic catgut. RESULTS: The median time taken for surgery was ten minutes in both groups. The range for Group A was 5 to 25 minutes, and the range for Group B was 5 to 20 minutes. There were no statistically significant differences in the pain scores between the two groups for any of the seven postoperative days studied. The median number of pethidine injections in Group A was 1 and in Group B was 0 (P<0.009). The number of oral analgesic tablets used was 8 (range, 4–10) and 14 (range, 0–10) for Groups A and B, respectively (P<0.001). The number of tubes of topical lignocaine jelly used was 14 (range, 0–22) and 14 (range, 7–88) in Groups A and B, respectively. Two patients in each group developed secondary hemorrhage, but no patient had anal stricturing. CONCLUSION: No excessive complications are seen with closed hemorrhoidectomy, and diathermy seems to require less postoperative analgesic medicine than scissors for closed hemorrhoidectomy except in the first 24 hours.     

Rectal Perforation, Retropneumoperitoneum, and Pneumomediastinum After Stapling Procedure for Prolapsed Hemorrhoids

Stapling procedure is a new technique for the surgical management of third-degree hemorrhoids. Even if long-term experience has not been reported, this new technique is generating a lot of interest and its use is becoming more common in Europe. Some articles have just been published about severe adverse effects of this operation, and in the present article we describe a case of a life-threatening complication that occurred with the use of the stapling technique for hemorrhoidectomy. A patient with perineal descensus and third-degree hemorrhoids underwent a stapling procedure for the treatment of hemorrhoids. Retropneumoperitoneum and pneumomediastinum developed on postoperative Day 2 and a colostomy was performed, allowing a quick recovery of the patient. After six months the colostomy was closed and bowel function restored. Our experience, taken together with some other cases previously published of severe complications after such an operation, suggests caution in the use of this new technique for the treatment of a benign disease.     

Red Hot Chili Pepper and Hemorrhoids: The Explosion of a Myth: Results of a Prospective, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Crossover Trial

Purpose Spicy foods are appreciated by a large part of the world population but have been blamed for causing hemorrhoids or exacerbating their symptoms, although no epidemiologic studies have been performed supporting this hypothesis. In this double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, crossover trial, we have studied the effects of a single dose of red hot chili pepper on the hemorrhoidal symptoms. Methods Fifty patients with second-degree and third-degree symptomatic hemorrhoids were randomly assigned to take a capsule containing red hot chili powder or placebo during lunch, scoring five hemorrhoidal symptoms (bleeding, swelling, pain, itching, and burning) on a visual analog scale. After one week, crossover treatment was administered according to the same methodology. Other treatments and foods potentially related with anorectal symptoms were discontinued during the study periods. Results Patients assigned low scores to their hemorrhoidal symptoms before the study and the scores remained unchanged during the 48 hours after both placebo and chili pepper treatment, the latter showing no statistically significant effects. Conclusions There is no scientific evidence that a spicy meal based on red hot chili pepper may worsen hemorrhoidal symptoms and, therefore, there is no reason to prevent these patients from occasionally enjoying a spicy dish if they so wish.     

A Randomized Prospective Trial Comparing Unsedated Endoscopy via Transnasal and Transoral Routes Using 5.5-mm Video Endoscopy

We performed a randomized prospective trial to compare unsedated endoscopy via transnasal and transoral routes using a small-caliber endoscope. Two hundred patients referred for diagnostic esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) were randomly allocated to two groups: those undergoing transnasal (TN) and transoral (TO) endoscopy. We examined the insertion rate, examination duration, nasal pain, pharyngeal pain, number of occurrences of pharyngeal reflex, severity of discomfort throughout the examination, and rate of adverse events. Patients were asked to rate the severity of their pain or discomfort on a 10-cm visual analog scale (VAS). We identified statistically significant differences between the TN and TO groups in rate of insertion (95% versus 100%, respectively, P < 0.05) and examination duration (9.7 ± 3.0 min versus 8.4 ± 2.7 min, respectively, P < 0.005). Severity of discomfort throughout the examination was comparable in the TN and TO groups (3.0 ± 1.8 versus 2.9 ± 2.3, NS). Nasal bleeding occurred as an adverse event in 4.1% of patients in the TN group. Patients in the TO group were more likely than those in the TN group to prefer the present method in the subsequent endoscopic examination (99.0% versus 82.1%, P < 0.00005). These results indicated that transoral insertion is superior to transnasal insertion in endoscopy procedures performed with small-caliber endoscope.     

Clinical Use of Micronized Purified Flavonoid Fraction for Treatment of Symptoms After Hemorrhoidectomy: Results of a Randomized,Controlled, Clinical Trial

PURPOSE The aim of this study was to evaluate if the combination of micronized purified flavonoid fraction with short-term routine antibiotic and anti-inflammatory therapy was better at reducing the intensity of postoperative symptoms and wound bleeding after a Milligan-Morgans open hemorrhoidectomy than antibiotic and anti-inflammatory treatment alone.METHODS Fifty patients were randomly assigned to receive routine antibiotic and anti-inflammatory treatment alone (control patients) or a combination of micronized purified flavonoid fraction with identical antibiotic and anti-inflammatory treatment (micronized purified flavonoid fraction patients). The evolution of symptoms (pain, tenesmus, pruritus, and bleeding) during the postoperative period was assessed by means of patients self-questionnaires. Each symptom was scored on a graded severity scale from 0 to 3, daily during the first three days of the immediate postoperative period, then at regular intervals (about every 14 days) until postoperative day 60. A global score for evaluation of each postoperative symptom and bleeding was used. The global score for each symptom was the sum of scores for each patient over the study period. The global score for each symptom was compared between the two groups with the Mann-Whitney U test.RESULTS No significant differences in age, gender distribution, and stage of disease between the two groups were noticed at baseline. Posthemorrhoidectomy symptoms were relieved more rapidly in the micronized purified flavonoid fraction group; during the first three postoperative days, the global score for each symptom was significantly more reduced in the micronized purified flavonoid fraction group. The global scores for each symptom are as follows: pain after 3 days, 6.16 (SD = 1.9) in the control group vs. 3.48 (SD = 1.8) in the micronized purified flavonoid fraction group (P < 0.0001); tenesmus, 5.36 (SD = 1.8) in the control group vs. 1.48 (SD = 1.5) in the micronized purified flavonoid fraction group (P < 0.0001); pruritus, 4.04 (SD = 1.9) in the control group vs. 1.84 (SD = 1.4) in the micronized purified flavonoid fraction group (P < 0.0001); bleeding, 4.4 (SD = 2.1) in the control group vs. 2.0 (SD = 1.3) in the micronized purified flavonoid fraction group (P < 0.0001). A significant difference (P < 0.0001) between groups was also shown in favor of micronized purified flavonoid fraction patients when global scores were calculated over the entire study period (60 days).CONCLUSION Micronized purified flavonoid fraction used in combination with short-term antibiotic and anti-inflammatory treatment can reduce both the duration and extent of postoperative symptoms and wound bleeding following hemorrhoidectomy.     

Transabdominal Anastomosis After Low Anterior Resection: A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Trial Comparing Long-Term Results Between Side-to-End Anastomosis and Colonic J-Pouch

PURPOSE Colonic J-pouch has been constructed to overcome reservoir dysfunction after restorative rectal surgery, whereas no effort has been made for sphincter dysfunction. We conducted a prospective, randomized study comparing surgical and functional outcomes between side-to-end anastomosis and colonic J-pouch after low anterior resection in which the anastomosis was constructed from the abdomen. METHODS Fifty-six consecutive patients with middle-to-low rectal cancer undergoing low anterior resection were randomly assigned to side-to-end or colonic J-pouch group preoperatively. Surgical outcomes of all the patients were recorded. Patients underwent functional evaluation, including anorectal manometry and functional assessment, preoperatively and then 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years postoperatively. RESULTS Twenty-four patients in each group completed the study. The demographic data and preoperative functional assessment did not differ between the two groups. There was no significant difference in surgical outcomes with regard to anastomotic height (5 cm), blood loss, protective colostomy, operative time, complications, and adjuvant therapy. Anal pressures showed no significant change postoperatively and during the follow-up period; there were no differences between the two groups. Temporal minor fecal incontinence was noted in the early postoperative period in both groups. With regard to bowel function, a significant reduction of volume of urgency and maximal tolerable volume was found postoperatively in both groups; however, a faster recovery was noted in the colonic J-pouch group. Stool frequency increased significantly after surgery in both groups; however, in contrast to rectal volume, a faster recovery was noted in the side-to-end group. CONCLUSIONS Anastomosis after low anterior resection for middle to low rectal cancer could be performed safely from the abdomen. It minimized sphincter injury and showed good continence preservation. On the other hand, the surgical outcomes and long-term functional results of side-to-end anastomosis were comparable with colonic J-pouch. Side-to-end anastomosis provides an easier, alternative way for reconstruction after restorative rectal surgery. Supported by Taipei Veterans General Hospital Research Fund (VGH 90-B-262). An erratum to this article is available at .     

Systematic Review on the Procedure for Prolapse and Hemorrhoids (Stapled Hemorrhoidopexy)

Purpose The procedure for prolapse and hemorrhoids (stapled hemorrhoidopexy) has been introduced as an alternative to conventional hemorrhoidectomy. This is a systematic review on stapled hemorrhoidopexy of all randomized, controlled trials that have been published until August 2006. Methods All published, randomized, controlled trials comparing stapled hemorrhoidopexy to conventional hemorrhoidectomy were identified from Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and all Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trial, Cochrane Database of Systemic Review, and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects) between January 1991 and August 2006. Meta-analysis was performed by using the Forest plot review if feasible. Results A total of 25 randomized, controlled trials with 1,918 procedures were reviewed. The follow-up duration was from 1 to 62 months. Stapled hemorrhoidopexy was associated with less operating time (weighted mean difference, −11.35 minutes; P = 0.006), earlier return of bowel function (weighted mean difference −9.91 hours; P < 0.00001), and shorter hospital stay (weighted mean difference, −1.07 days; P = 0.0004). There was less pain after stapled hemorrhoidopexy, as evidenced by lower pain scores at rest and on defecation and 37.6 percent reduction in analgesic requirement. The stapled hemorrhoidopexy allowed a faster functional recovery with shorter time off work (weighted mean difference, −8.45 days; P < 0.00001), earlier return to normal activities (weighted mean difference, −15.85 days; P = 0.03), and better wound healing (odds ratio, 0.1; P = 0.0006). The patients’ satisfaction was significantly higher with stapled hemorrhoidopexy than conventional hemorrhoidectomy (odds ratio, 2.33; P = 0.003). Although there was increase in the recurrence of hemorrhoids at one year or more after stapled procedure (5.7 vs. 1 percent; odds ratio, 3.48; P = 0.02), the overall incidence of recurrent hemorrhoidal symptoms—early (fewer than 6 months; stapled vs. conventional: 24.8 vs. 31.7 percent; P = 0.08) or late (1 year or more) recurrence rate (stapled vs. conventional: 25.3 vs. 18.7 percent; P = 0.07)—was similar. The overall complication rate did not differ significantly from that of conventional procedure (stapled vs. conventional: 20.2 vs. 25.2 percent; P = 0.06). Compared with conventional surgery, stapled hemorrhoidopexy has less postoperative bleeding (odds ratio, 0.52; P = 0.001), wound complication (odds ratio, 0.05; P = 0.005), constipation (odds ratio, 0.45; P = 0.02), and pruritus (odds ratio, 0.19; P = 0.02). The overall need of surgical (odds ratio, 1.27; P = 0.4) and nonsurgical (odds ratio, 1.07; P = 0.82) reintervention after the two procedures was similar. Conclusions The Procedure for Prolapse and Hemorrhoid (stapled hemorrhoidopexy) is safe with many short-term benefits. The long-term results are similar to conventional procedure. Read at the meeting of The American Society of Colon and Rectal Surgeons, Seattle, Washington, June 3 to 7, 2006.