Abstract
Introduction: Although effective, conventional excisional haemorrhoidectomy (CEH) is associated with significant postoperative pain. Novel techniques such as transanal haemorrhoidal dearterialization (THD) are suggested to reduce pain but may result in higher recurrence rates. We aimed to compare short- and long-term outcomes of CEH and THD in the present meta-analysis. Methods: A PRISMA-compliant meta-analysis was performed, searching PubMed, Embase, and CENTRAL databases for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) from 1995 to December 2022. The primary objective was recurrence. Secondary objectives included complication rates, length of stay (LOS), operative time, and time to return to baseline. Random-effects models were used to calculate pooled effect size estimates. Subgroup analysis was also performed. Results: A total of 6 RCTs encompassing 465 patients were captured. There were 142 (59%) males in the CEH group and 129 (54%) in the THD group. On random-effects analysis, THD had a higher recurrence rate (odds ratio = 2.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.03–7.38, p = 0.04) albeit a shorter return to baseline compared to CEH (mean difference = −14.05 days, 95% CI = −20.38 to −7.72, p < 0.0001). There were no differences in bleeding (p = 0.12), urinary retention (p = 0.97), incontinence (p = 0.41), anal stenosis (p = 0.19), thrombosed residual haemorrhoids (p = 0.16), operating time (p = 0.19), or LOS (p = 0.22). Results remained similar on subgroup analysis. Conclusions: CEH is associated with lower recurrence but similar complication rates to THD, although patients take longer to return to baseline function postoperatively.
Journal Section:
Systematic Review
References
1.
Johanson
JF
, Sonnenberg
A
. The prevalence of hemorrhoids and chronic constipation. An epidemiologic study
. Gastroenterology
. 1990
;98
(2
):380
–6
. 2.
Peery
AF
, Crockett
SD
, Barritt
AS
, Dellon
ES
, Eluri
S
, Gangarosa
LM
, et al. Burden of gastrointestinal, liver, and pancreatic diseases in the United States
. Gastroenterology
. 2015
;149
(7
):1731
–41.e3
. 3.
Yang
JY
, Peery
AF
, Lund
JL
, Pate
V
, Sandler
RS
. Burden and cost of outpatient hemorrhoids in the United States employer-insured population, 2014
. Am J Gastroenterol
. 2019
;114
(5
):798
–803
. 4.
Loder
PB
, Kamm
MA
, Nicholls
RJ
, Phillips
RK
. Haemorrhoids: pathology, pathophysiology and aetiology
. Br J Surg
. 1994
;81
(7
):946
–54
. 5.
Gazet
JC
, Redding
W
, Rickett
JW
. The prevalence of haemorrhoids. A preliminary survey
. Proc R Soc Med
. 1970
;63
(Suppl 1
):78
–80
.6.
7.
Lohsiriwat
V
. Hemorrhoids: from basic pathophysiology to clinical management
. World J Gastroenterol
. 2012
;18
(17
):2009
–17
. 8.
Altomare
DF
, Giuratrabocchetta
S
. Conservative and surgical treatment of haemorrhoids
. Nat Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol
. 2013
;10
(9
):513
–21
. 9.
Lohsiriwat
V
. Treatment of hemorrhoids: a coloproctologist’s view
. World J Gastroenterol
. 2015
;21
(31
):9245
–52
. 10.
Mott
T
, Latimer
K
, Edwards
C
. Hemorrhoids: diagnosis and treatment options
. Am Fam Physician
. 2018
;97
(3
):172
–9
.11.
Arroyo
A
, Perez
F
, Miranda
E
, Serrano
P
, Candela
F
, Lacueva
J
, et al. Open versus closed day-case haemorrhoidectomy - is there a difference? Resuls of a prospective randomised study
. Int J Colorectal Dis
. 2004
;19
(4
):370
–3
. 12.
Jin
JZ
, Bhat
S
, Lee
K-T
, Xia
W
, Hill
AG
. Interventional treatments for prolapsing haemorrhoids: network meta-analysis
. BJS Open
. 2021
;5
(5
):zrab091
. 13.
Cheetham
MJ
, Phillips
RK
. Evidence-based practice in haemorrhoidectomy
. Colorectal Dis
. 2001
;3
(2
):126
–34
. 14.
Ng
K-S
, Holzgang
M
, Young
C
. Still a case of “No pain, No gain”? An updated and critical review of the pathogenesis, diagnosis, and management options for hemorrhoids in 2020
. Ann Coloproctol
. 2020
;36
(3
):133
–47
. 15.
Re
AD
, Toh
JWT
, Iredell
J
, Ctercteko
G
. Metronidazole in the management of post-open haemorrhoidectomy pain: systematic review
. Ann Coloproctol
. 2020
;36
(1
):5
–11
. 16.
Dekker
L
, Han-Geurts
IJM
, Rørvik
HD
, van Dieren
S
, Bemelman
WA
. Rubber band ligation versus haemorrhoidectomy for the treatment of grade II-III haemorrhoids: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
. Tech Coloproctol
. 2021
;25
(6
):663
–74
. 17.
Walega
P
, Krokowicz
P
, Romaniszyn
M
, Kenig
J
, Sałówka
J
, Nowakowski
M
, et al. Doppler guided haemorrhoidal arterial ligation with Recto-Anal-Repair (RAR) for the treatment of advanced haemorrhoidal disease
. Colorectal Dis
. 2010
;12
(10 Online
):e326
–9
. 18.
Pucher
PH
, Sodergren
MH
, Lord
AC
, Darzi
A
, Ziprin
P
. Clinical outcome following Doppler-guided haemorrhoidal artery ligation: a systematic review
. Colorectal Dis
. 2013
;15
(6
):e284
–94
. 19.
Tiernan
J
, Hind
D
, Watson
A
, Wailoo
AJ
, Bradburn
M
, Shephard
N
, et al. The HubBLe trial: Haemorrhoidal Artery Ligation (HAL) versus Rubber Band Ligation (RBL) for haemorrhoids
. BMC Gastroenterol
. 2012
;12
:153
. 20.
Xu
L
, Chen
H
, Lin
G
, Ge
Q
, Qi
H
, He
X
. Transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization with mucopexy versus open hemorrhoidectomy in the treatment of hemorrhoids: a meta-analysis of randomized control trials
. Tech Coloproctol
. 2016
;20
(12
):825
–33
. 21.
Page
MJ
, McKenzie
JE
, Bossuyt
PM
, Boutron
I
, Hoffmann
TC
, Mulrow
CD
, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews
. BMJ
. 2021
;372
:n71
. 22.
Shea
BJ
, Reeves
BC
, Wells
G
, Thuku
M
, Hamel
C
, Moran
J
, et al. Amstar 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both
. BMJ
. 2017
;358
:j4008
. 23.
Higgins
JPT
, Thomas
J
, Chandler
J
, Cumpston
M
, Li
T
Cochrane Handbook for systematic reviews of interventions
. 2021
;version 6.2
. Available from: https://training.cochrane.org/handbook24.
DerSimonian
R
, Laird
N
. Meta-analysis in clinical trials
. Control Clin Trials
. 1986
;7
(3
):177
–88
. 25.
Sterne
JAC
, Savović
J
, Page
MJ
, Elbers
RG
, Blencowe
NS
, Boutron
I
, et al. RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials
. BMJ
. 2019
;366
:l4898
. 26.
McGuinness
LA
, Higgins
JPT
. Risk-of-bias VISualization (robvis): an R package and Shiny web app for visualizing risk-of-bias assessments
. Res Synth Methods
. 2021
;12
(1
):55
–61
. 27.
Denoya
PI
, Fakhoury
M
, Chang
K
, Fakhoury
J
, Bergamaschi
R
. Dearterialization with mucopexy versus haemorrhoidectomy for grade III or IV haemorrhoids: short-term results of a double-blind randomized controlled trial
. Colorectal Dis
. 2013
;15
(10
):1281
–8
. 28.
Bursics
A
, Morvay
K
, Kupcsulik
P
, Flautner
L
. Comparison of early and 1-year follow-up results of conventional hemorrhoidectomy and hemorrhoid artery ligation: a randomized study
. Int J Colorectal Dis
. 2004
;19
(2
):176
–80
. 29.
Rørvik
HD
, Campos
AH
, Styr
K
, Ilum
L
, McKinstry
GK
, Brandstrup
B
, et al. Minimal open hemorrhoidectomy versus transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization: the effect on symptoms: an open-label randomized controlled trial
. Dis Colon Rectum
. 2020
;63
(5
):655
–67
. 30.
Elshazly
WG
, Gazal
AE
, Madbouly
K
, Hussen
A
. Ligation anopexy versus hemorrhoidectomy in the treatment of second- and third-degree hemorrhoids
. Tech Coloproctol
. 2015
;19
(1
):29
–34
. 31.
De Nardi
P
, Capretti
G
, Corsaro
A
, Staudacher
C
. A prospective, randomized trial comparing the short- and long-term results of Doppler-guided transanal hemorrhoid dearterialization with mucopexy versus excision hemorrhoidectomy for grade III hemorrhoids
. Dis Colon Rectum
. 2014
;57
(3
):348
–53
. 32.
Elmér
SE
, Nygren
JO
, Lenander
CE
. A randomized trial of transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization with anopexy compared with open hemorrhoidectomy in the treatment of hemorrhoids
. Dis Colon Rectum
. 2013
;56
(4
):484
–90
. 33.
Genova
P
, Damiano
G
, Lo Monte
AI
, Genova
G
. Transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization versus Milligan-Morgan hemorrhoidectomy in grade III/IV hemorrhoids
. Ann Ital Chir
. 2019
;90
:145
–51
.34.
Aigner
F
, Bodner
G
, Conrad
F
, Mbaka
G
, Kreczy
A
, Fritsch
H
. The superior rectal artery and its branching pattern with regard to its clinical influence on ligation techniques for internal hemorrhoids
. Am J Surg
. 2004
;187
(1
):102
–8
. 35.
Gupta
PJ
, Kalaskar
S
, Taori
S
, Heda
PS
. Doppler-guided hemorrhoidal artery ligation does not offer any advantage over suture ligation of grade 3 symptomatic hemorrhoids
. Tech Coloproctol
. 2011
;15
(4
):439
–44
. 36.
Alemrajabi
M
, Akbari
A
, Sohrabi
S
, Rezazadehkermani
M
, Moradi
M
, Agah
S
, et al. Simple mucopexy and hemorrhoidal arterial ligation with and without Doppler guide: a randomized clinical trial for short-term outcome
. Ann Coloproctol
. 2023
;39
(4
):351
–6
. 37.
Ratto
C
, Parello
A
, Donisi
L
, Litta
F
, Doglietto
GB
. Anorectal physiology is not changed following transanal haemorrhoidal dearterialization for haemorrhoidal disease: clinical, manometric and endosonographic features
. Colorectal Dis
. 2011
;13
(8
):e243
–5
. 38.
López-Delgado
A
, Arroyo
A
, Ruiz-Tovar
J
, Alcaide
MJ
, Diez
M
, Moya
P
, et al. Effect on anal pressure of percutaneous posterior tibial nerve stimulation for faecal incontinence
. Colorectal Dis
. 2014
;16
(7
):533
–7
. © 2024 S. Karger AG, Basel
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
2024
You do not currently have access to this content.
