Journal of gastrointestinal surgery : official journal of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract · 2016
Doppler-Guided Transanal Hemorrhoidal Dearterialization (DG-THD) Versus Stapled Hemorrhoidopexy (SH) in the Treatment of Third-Degree Hemorrhoids: Clinical Results at Short and Long-Term Follow-Up.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Leardi S, Pessia B, Mascio M, Piccione F, Schietroma M, Pietroletti R
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The stapled hemorrhoidopexy (SH) and the Doppler-guided transanal hemorrhoidal dearterialization (DG-THD) are minimally invasive procedures for the surgical treatment of hemorrhoids. This study aims to verify the efficacy of the DG-THD versus the SH in the treatment of third-degree hemorrhoids.
METHOD: One hundred consecutive patients were causally allocated to either procedure, obtaining two groups of 50 pts. A clinical examination was performed at 3, 7, 15, and 30 days after the operation. Quality of life, anal symptoms, recurrence of hemorrhoids, and reoperation were assessed by means of a questionnaire and of a clinical examination at long-term follow-up (7.0 year average).
RESULTS: At short-term follow-up, the median postoperative pain score was significantly lower in DG-THD group compared to SH group, (V.A.S 2 vs 6; t = 2.65, p < 0.01). The morbidity rate and the return to normal life and work were similar after the two procedures. At long-term follow-up, the incidence of piles was not statistically different between the two groups (DG-THD 10.0 %; SH 14.0 %). No differences were reported by patients in terms of satisfaction for surgery.
CONCLUSION: SH and DG-THD procedures do not show significantly different results with regard to the patients outcome. However, considering the lower p. o. pain, the DG-THD might be proposed as the first line treatment in third-degree hemorrhoids.
METHOD: One hundred consecutive patients were causally allocated to either procedure, obtaining two groups of 50 pts. A clinical examination was performed at 3, 7, 15, and 30 days after the operation. Quality of life, anal symptoms, recurrence of hemorrhoids, and reoperation were assessed by means of a questionnaire and of a clinical examination at long-term follow-up (7.0 year average).
RESULTS: At short-term follow-up, the median postoperative pain score was significantly lower in DG-THD group compared to SH group, (V.A.S 2 vs 6; t = 2.65, p < 0.01). The morbidity rate and the return to normal life and work were similar after the two procedures. At long-term follow-up, the incidence of piles was not statistically different between the two groups (DG-THD 10.0 %; SH 14.0 %). No differences were reported by patients in terms of satisfaction for surgery.
CONCLUSION: SH and DG-THD procedures do not show significantly different results with regard to the patients outcome. However, considering the lower p. o. pain, the DG-THD might be proposed as the first line treatment in third-degree hemorrhoids.