Techniques in coloproctology · 2016
Transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization with mucopexy versus open hemorrhoidectomy in the treatment of hemorrhoids: a meta-analysis of randomized control trials.
СтатьяМетаанализОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Xu L, Chen H, Lin G, Ge Q, Qi H, He X
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to analyse the outcomes of transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization with mucopexy (THDm) versus open hemorrhoidectomy (OH) in the management of hemorrhoids.
METHODS: Randomized controlled trials in English were found by searching PubMed, Web of science, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library database. Trials that compared THDm with OH were identified. Data were extracted independently for each study, and a meta-analysis was performed using fixed and random effects models.
RESULTS: Four trials, including 316 patients, met the inclusion criteria. No statistically significant differences were noted in either total complications or postoperative bleeding, incontinence, recurrent prolapse, and urinary retention rate. Operative time was significantly longer for THDm with Doppler guidance than for THDm without Doppler guidance. Patients returned to normal activities faster after THDm than after OH. No statistically significant differences between THDm and OH were noted with regard to recurrence and reoperation rates.
CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis shows that THDm and OH are equally effective and can be attempted for the management of hemorrhoids. However, for THDm with Doppler guidance, more instruments and a longer operative time are required. Future large-scale, high-quality, multicenter trials with long-term outcomes are needed to prove these results and determine whether Doppler guidance in THD is truly necessary or not.
METHODS: Randomized controlled trials in English were found by searching PubMed, Web of science, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library database. Trials that compared THDm with OH were identified. Data were extracted independently for each study, and a meta-analysis was performed using fixed and random effects models.
RESULTS: Four trials, including 316 patients, met the inclusion criteria. No statistically significant differences were noted in either total complications or postoperative bleeding, incontinence, recurrent prolapse, and urinary retention rate. Operative time was significantly longer for THDm with Doppler guidance than for THDm without Doppler guidance. Patients returned to normal activities faster after THDm than after OH. No statistically significant differences between THDm and OH were noted with regard to recurrence and reoperation rates.
CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis shows that THDm and OH are equally effective and can be attempted for the management of hemorrhoids. However, for THDm with Doppler guidance, more instruments and a longer operative time are required. Future large-scale, high-quality, multicenter trials with long-term outcomes are needed to prove these results and determine whether Doppler guidance in THD is truly necessary or not.