Skip to main content
Top
Published in: International Journal of Colorectal Disease 3/2004

01-05-2004 | Original Article

Hemorrhoidal stapler prolapsectomy vs. Milligan-Morgan hemorrhoidectomy: a long-term randomized trial

Authors: A. Racalbuto, I. Aliotta, G. Corsaro, R. Lanteri, A. Di Cataldo, A. Licata

Published in: International Journal of Colorectal Disease | Issue 3/2004

Login to get access

Abstract

Background and aims

The notable success of stapled prolapsectomy in recent years led us to compare this technique with Milligan-Morgan hemorrhoidectomy in terms of the results obtained both in the immediate postoperative period and in the long term.

Patients and methods

We performed conventional hemorrhoidectomy on 50 randomly selected patients and operated on a further 50 using the stapler technique. The patients were monitored over the immediate postoperative period (e.g., type of anesthesia, mean duration of operation, mean hospitalization time, analgesic administration, time before returning to work) and over a long-term follow-up period of 48 months (later complications such as prolapse relapse, bleeding, stenosis, incontinence).

Results

The stapled group experienced significantly less pain (mean number of analgesic tablets 2.60 vs. 15.9) and returned to normal activity sooner (8.04 vs. 16.9 days), as reported by other authors. In the long-term follow-up at 48 months, stapled hemorrhoidectomy was found to control prolapse, discharge, and bleeding, with no stenosis or significant incontinence, in 94% of cases.

Conclusion

Our conclusions confirm the excellent advantages of stapled hemorrhoidectomy which allows the rapid recovery of patients and also promises the complete resolution of hemorrhoidal prolapse in the long term.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Rowsel M, Bello M, Hemigway DM (2000) Circumferential mucosectomy (stapled haemorrhoidectomy) versus conventional haemorrhoidectomy: randomised controlled trial. Lancet 355:779–781CrossRefPubMed Rowsel M, Bello M, Hemigway DM (2000) Circumferential mucosectomy (stapled haemorrhoidectomy) versus conventional haemorrhoidectomy: randomised controlled trial. Lancet 355:779–781CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Mehigan BJ, Monson JRT, Hartley JE (2000) Stapling procedure for haemorrhoids versus Milligan-Morgan haemorrhoidectomy: randomised controlled trial. Lancet 355:782–785CrossRefPubMed Mehigan BJ, Monson JRT, Hartley JE (2000) Stapling procedure for haemorrhoids versus Milligan-Morgan haemorrhoidectomy: randomised controlled trial. Lancet 355:782–785CrossRefPubMed
3.
4.
go back to reference Shalaby R, Desoky A (2000) Randomized clinical trial of stapled versus Milligan-Morgan haemorrhoidectomy. Br J Surg 88:1049–1053CrossRef Shalaby R, Desoky A (2000) Randomized clinical trial of stapled versus Milligan-Morgan haemorrhoidectomy. Br J Surg 88:1049–1053CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Ganio E, Altomare DF, Gabrielli F, Milito G, Canuti S (2001) Prospective randomized. multicentre trial comparing stapled with open haemorrhoidectomy. Br J Surg 88:669–674PubMed Ganio E, Altomare DF, Gabrielli F, Milito G, Canuti S (2001) Prospective randomized. multicentre trial comparing stapled with open haemorrhoidectomy. Br J Surg 88:669–674PubMed
6.
go back to reference Ho YH, Seow-Cohen F, Tsang C, Eu KW (2001) Randomized trial assessing anal sphincter injuries after stapled haemorrhoidectomy. Br J Surg 88:1449–1455CrossRefPubMed Ho YH, Seow-Cohen F, Tsang C, Eu KW (2001) Randomized trial assessing anal sphincter injuries after stapled haemorrhoidectomy. Br J Surg 88:1449–1455CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Engel AE, Eijsbouts QAJ (2000) Haemorrhoidectomy: painful choice. Lancet 355:2253–2254 Engel AE, Eijsbouts QAJ (2000) Haemorrhoidectomy: painful choice. Lancet 355:2253–2254
8.
go back to reference Ortiz H, Marzo J, Armedariz P (2002) Randomized clinical trial of stapled haemorrhoipexy versus conventional diathermy haemorrhoidectomy. Br J Surg 89:1376–1381CrossRef Ortiz H, Marzo J, Armedariz P (2002) Randomized clinical trial of stapled haemorrhoipexy versus conventional diathermy haemorrhoidectomy. Br J Surg 89:1376–1381CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Jorge JMN, Wexner SI (1993) Etiology and management of faecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 36:77–97PubMed Jorge JMN, Wexner SI (1993) Etiology and management of faecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 36:77–97PubMed
10.
go back to reference Cheetham MJ, Mortensen NJM, Nystrom PO, Kamm MA, Phillips RK (2000) Persistent pain and faecal urgency after stapled haemorrhoidectomy. Lancet 356:730–733CrossRefPubMed Cheetham MJ, Mortensen NJM, Nystrom PO, Kamm MA, Phillips RK (2000) Persistent pain and faecal urgency after stapled haemorrhoidectomy. Lancet 356:730–733CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Succi L, Russello D, Racalbuto A, Scilletta B, Carnazza M, Scuderi M, Favetta A, Latteri F (1989) Valutazione dei risultati a distanza dopo emorroidectomia secondo Milligan-Morgan. Riv Ital Colonproctol 8:131–136 Succi L, Russello D, Racalbuto A, Scilletta B, Carnazza M, Scuderi M, Favetta A, Latteri F (1989) Valutazione dei risultati a distanza dopo emorroidectomia secondo Milligan-Morgan. Riv Ital Colonproctol 8:131–136
Metadata
Title
Hemorrhoidal stapler prolapsectomy vs. Milligan-Morgan hemorrhoidectomy: a long-term randomized trial
Authors
A. Racalbuto
I. Aliotta
G. Corsaro
R. Lanteri
A. Di Cataldo
A. Licata
Publication date
01-05-2004
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
International Journal of Colorectal Disease / Issue 3/2004
Print ISSN: 0179-1958
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1262
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-003-0547-3

Other articles of this Issue 3/2004

International Journal of Colorectal Disease 3/2004 Go to the issue