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.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Rowsel M, Bello M, Hemigway DM (2000) Circumferential mucosectomy (stapled haemorrhoidectomy) versus conventional haemorrhoidectomy: randomised controlled trial. Lancet 355:779–781
Mehigan BJ, Monson JRT, Hartley JE (2000) Stapling procedure for haemorrhoids versus Milligan-Morgan haemorrhoidectomy: randomised controlled trial. Lancet 355:782–785
Fazio VW (2000) Early promise of stapling technique for haemorrhoidectomy. Lancet 355:768–769
Shalaby R, Desoky A (2000) Randomized clinical trial of stapled versus Milligan-Morgan haemorrhoidectomy. Br J Surg 88:1049–1053
Ganio E, Altomare DF, Gabrielli F, Milito G, Canuti S (2001) Prospective randomized. multicentre trial comparing stapled with open haemorrhoidectomy. Br J Surg 88:669–674
Ho YH, Seow-Cohen F, Tsang C, Eu KW (2001) Randomized trial assessing anal sphincter injuries after stapled haemorrhoidectomy. Br J Surg 88:1449–1455
Engel AE, Eijsbouts QAJ (2000) Haemorrhoidectomy: painful choice. Lancet 355:2253–2254
Ortiz H, Marzo J, Armedariz P (2002) Randomized clinical trial of stapled haemorrhoipexy versus conventional diathermy haemorrhoidectomy. Br J Surg 89:1376–1381
Jorge JMN, Wexner SI (1993) Etiology and management of faecal incontinence. Dis Colon Rectum 36:77–97
Cheetham MJ, Mortensen NJM, Nystrom PO, Kamm MA, Phillips RK (2000) Persistent pain and faecal urgency after stapled haemorrhoidectomy. Lancet 356:730–733
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
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Racalbuto, A., Aliotta, I., Corsaro, G. et al. Hemorrhoidal stapler prolapsectomy vs. Milligan-Morgan hemorrhoidectomy: a long-term randomized trial. Int J Colorectal Dis 19, 239–244 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-003-0547-3
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00384-003-0547-3