Haemorrhoid artery ligation - recto anal repair (HAL-RAR) blind versus Doppler: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND

Haemorrhoids remain a highly prevalent condition in Australia, affecting 39% of the adult Australian population. While haemorrhoidectomy remains the gold standard in the management of haemorrhoids, newer techniques such as haemorrhoid artery ligation-recto anal repair (HAL-RAR) are emerging as promising management modalities. We compare the efficacy of non-Doppler guided (non-DG) HAL-RAR versus Doppler-guided (DG) HAL-RAR in the management of haemorrhoids.

METHODS

This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022353806) and adhered to PRISMA 2020 guidelines. We conducted a systematic review using Medline, Embase and Cochrane database for comparative studies between Doppler-guided HAL-RAR and non-Doppler-guided HAL-RAR in accordance with the PRISMA 2020 statement for reporting systematic reviews.

RESULTS

Five studies were included in our systematic review and meta-analysis. There was no clinically significant difference in operative times (SMD 0.46, 9% CI -3.16 0 4.08, P = 0.804) or post-operative bleeding (P = 0.142) between the two groups. DG HAL-RAR patients were more likely to have post-operative urinary retention (P < 0.001). Non-DG patients were less likely to experience recurrence (OR 5.12, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Our review of non-DG HAL-RAR compared to DG HAL-RAR reflects the non-inferiority of the non-DG HALRAR procedure. We hope that these results would provide a guide to clinicians performing HAL-RAR, and would provide some cost savings for institutions who are unable to procure the necessary equipment for DG HAL-RAR.