RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The classification for HD was developed by Goligher in 1980 and does not contemplate important aspects of this disease, which limits its use in guiding treatment. The aim of this study if to apply in clinical practice the new classification for hemorrhoids named BPRST (bleeding, prolapse, reduction, skin tags, thrombosis), to compare it with the original classification proposed by Goligher and to propose an algorithm for treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a prospective study conducted at the University of São Paulo's teaching hospital and Hospital 9 de Julho. Patients with HD treated from March 2011 to July 2013 were included. Patients were classified according to BPRST and Goligher classifications and treated according to personal experience and most updated guidelines. The association between both classifications and the treatment adopted was compared and an algorithm for treatment was developed. RESULTS: 229 patients were included in this study and 28 patients were lost due to follow-up. According to Goligher, 29, 61, 85 and 26 were classified as grades I, II, III and IV, respectively. According to the BPRST, 23 were classified as stage I, 95 as stage II and 83 as stage III. Six patients classified as Goligher I were reclassified as BPRST stage III and required conventional hemorrhoidectomy, either due to thrombosis (n = 4) or intolerable skin tags (n = 2). The BPRST classification was more closely associated with the type of treatment employed and had few outliers than Goligher (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: There are limitations to the use of Goligher's classification in clinical practice. The novel BPRST classification includes important aspects of HD that should be considered when deciding the best treatment option. Our algorithm for treatment contemplates the most commonly used techniques and can help to guide the treatment of this complex disease.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization (THD) is an effective treatment for hemorrhoidal disease (HD). However, the surgical technique is not standardized and the results for advanced HD are controversial. The aim of this study was to assess surgical outcomes after a long follow-up and compare total and partial mucopexy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between March 2011 and July 2014, THD was offered to patients with symptomatic prolapsed hemorrhoids (Grades II, III and IV). Dearterialization was performed with the guidance of Ultrasound Doppler and mucopexy for prolapsed piles, and regarded as total or partial (if less than 6 mucopexies). Post-operative complications, long-term results and patients' satisfaction rates were analyzed. RESULTS: 200 consecutive patients were recruited with a mean follow-up of 43 months (range 29 - 57 months). HD distribution was GII (N = 35, 17.5%), GIII (N = 124, 62%), and GIV (N = 41, 20.5%). Postoperative complications included transient tenesmus (26,5%), pain (14%) and fecal impaction (2,5%). Recurrence rates were 0, 2,4% and 17,1% for prolapse (p < 0,01) and 2,9%, 4% and 9,8% for bleeding (p = 0,33) in grades II, III and IV, respectively. Total mucopexy resulted in more tenesmus (31,2%) than partial mucopexy (14,5%), (p < 0,01). After 12 weeks of follow-up, 85% of patients were either very satisfied or satisfied; 8,5% were dissatisfied. CONCLUSION: THD-mucopexy is safe with low overall recurrence. Grade IV HD is associated with more recurrence and postoperative complications. Total mucopexy is associated with more tenesmus, pain and fecal impaction. A tailor-made procedure with selective dearterialization and mucopexy may be the next step in this evolving technique.
