Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 1 de 1
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
World J Gastroenterol ; 21(8): 2490-6, 2015 Feb 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25741159

ABSTRACT

AIM: To compare the effects and postoperative complications between tissue selecting therapy stapler (TST) and Milligan-Morgan hemorrhoidectomy (M-M). METHODS: Four hundred and eighty patients with severe prolapsing hemorrhoids, who were admitted to the Shenyang Coloproctology Hospital between 2009 and 2012, were randomly divided into observation (n=240) and control (n=240) groups. Hemorrhoidectomies were performed with TST in the observation group and with the M-M technique in the control group. The therapeutic effects, operation security, and postoperative complications in the two groups were compared. The immediate and long-term complications were assessed according to corresponding criteria. Pain was assessed on a visual analogue scale. The efficacy was assessed by specialized criteria. The follow-up was conducted one year after the operation. RESULTS: The total effective rates of the observation and control groups were 99.5% (217/218) and 98.6% (218/221) respectively; the difference was not statistically significant (P=0.322). Their were significant differences between observation and control groups in intraoperative blood loss (5.07±1.14 vs 2.45±0.57, P=0.000), pain (12 h after the surgery: 5.08±1.62 vs 7.19±2.01, P=0.000; at first dressing change: 2.64±0.87 vs 4.34±1.15, P=0.000; first defecation: 3.91±1.47 vs 5.63±1.98, P=0.001), urine retention (n=22 vs n=47, P=0.001), anal pendant expansion after the surgery (2.35±0.56 vs 5.16±1.42, P=0.000), operation time (18.3±5.6 min vs 29.5±8.2 min, P=0.000), and the length of hospital stay (5.3±0.6 d vs 11.4±1.8 d, P=0.000). Moreover TST showed significant reductions compared to M-M in the rates of long-term complications such as fecal incontinence (n=3 vs n=16, P=0.003), difficult bowel movement (n=1 vs n=9, P=0.011), intractable pain (n=2 vs n=12, P=0.007), and anal discharge (n=3 vs n=23, P=0.000). CONCLUSION: TST for severe prolapsing hemorrhoids is a satisfactory technique for more rapid recovery, lower complication rates, and higher operation security.


Subject(s)
Hemorrhoidectomy , Hemorrhoids/surgery , Rectal Prolapse/surgery , Surgical Stapling , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Blood Loss, Surgical , China , Defecation , Female , Hemorrhoidectomy/adverse effects , Hemorrhoids/complications , Hemorrhoids/diagnosis , Hemorrhoids/physiopathology , Humans , Length of Stay , Male , Middle Aged , Operative Time , Pain Measurement , Pain, Postoperative/diagnosis , Pain, Postoperative/etiology , Patient Satisfaction , Recovery of Function , Rectal Prolapse/diagnosis , Rectal Prolapse/etiology , Rectal Prolapse/physiopathology , Severity of Illness Index , Surgical Stapling/adverse effects , Surveys and Questionnaires , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...