Recent trends in management of haemorrhoids

S. Asif Ali; Mohammad Fazelul Rahman Shoeb

doi:10.18203/2349-2902.isj20171127

Authors

S. Asif Ali Associate Professor, Department of General surgery, ESIC Medical college, Kalburagi, Karnataka, India
Mohammad Fazelul Rahman Shoeb Senior resident, Department of General surgery, Gulbarga Institute of Medical Sciences, Kalburagi, Karnataka, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2349-2902.isj20171127

Keywords:

Haemorrhoidectomy, Lords dilatation procedure, Proctoscopy, Postoperative complications

Abstract

Background: Haemorrhoids are common clinical conditions. Their treatment is one of the most challenging situations in the field of general surgery. In this study, we compared and evaluated the results and postoperative complications of Lords dilatation procedure and haemorrhoidectomy.

Methods: The study evaluates comparative results of Lords dilatation procedure and haemorrhoidectomy. This study was conducted over a period of 1 year from January 1984 to December 1984. It includes 40 patients with haemorrhoids who attended surgical OPD of Krishnarajendra Hospital, Mysore. These 40 patients were selected randomly and divided into two groups of 20 patients each (Lords dilatation group and haemorrhoidectomy group). All parameters including clinical, physical and baseline investigations for all patients were recorded and finally analysed.

Results: The age of the patients ranged from 20-70 years. Male preponderance was observed (7:1). The commonest symptoms were mass per rectum (90% and 85%) and bleeding P/R (85%), pain during defecation (85% and 70%) in Lords dilatation and haemorrhoidectomy groups respectively. Protoscopic examination revealed the presence of grade II haemorrhoids in most of the patients in both the groups, 45% and 65% respectively. Postoperative complications including pain, sphincter incontinence, bleeding and urinary retention is high in haemorrhoidectomy group as compared to Lords dilatation group. Recurrence of haemorrhoids (5%) and fecal incontinence (5%) was observed in Lords dilatation group after 6 months of treatment.

Conclusions: Haemorrhoidectomy for treatment of hemorrhoids offers the best immediate and long term results compared to Lords dilatation.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Agrawal S, Chopra S. Comparative Study between Conventional Hemorrhoidectomy versus Stapled Hemorrhoidopexy at Ja Group of Hospitals Gwalior. IOSR J Dental Med Sci. 2016;15(12):69-94.

Agbo SP. Surgical Management of Hemorrhoids. J Surg Tech Case Rep. 2011;3(2):68-75.

Cohen Z. Alternatives to surgical haemorrhoidectomy. Can J Surg. 1985;28:230-1.

Brisinda G. How to treat haemorrhoids. BMJ. 2000;321:582-3.

Gartell PC, Sheridan RJ, McGinn FP. Outpatient treatment of haemorrhoids: A randomized clinical trial to compare rubber band ligation with phenol injection. B J Surg. 1985;72:478-9.

Konsten J, Baeten CG. Hemorrhoidectomy Vs Lord's method: 17-year follow-up of a prospective randomized trial. Dis Colon Rectum. 2000;43:503-6.

Mortensen PE, Olsen J, Pedersen LK, Christiansen J. A randomized study on haemorrhoidectomy combined with anal canal dilatation. Dis Colon Rectum. 1987;30:755-7.

Gagloo MA, Wardul Hijaz S, Aijaz Nasir S, Reyaz A, Bakshi IH, Chowdary NA, et al. Comparative Study of Hemorrhoidectomy and Rubber Band Ligation in Treatment of Second and Third Degree Hemorrhoids in Kashmir. Indian J Surg. 2013;75(5):356-60.

Hosch SB, Knoefel WT, Pichlmeier U, Schulze V, Busch C, Gawad KA. Surgical treatment of piles: prospective, randomized study of Parks vs. Milligan-Morgan hemorrhoidectomy. Dis Colon Rectum. 1998;41(2):159-64.

Steinberg DA, Liegois HJ, Willaims A. Long term review of the results of rubber band ligation of haemorrhoids. BJS. 1975;62:144-6.

Vellacott KD, Hardcastle JD. Is continued anal dilatation necessary after a Lord’s procedure for haemorrhoids. BJS. 1980;67:658-59.

Cheng FC, Shum DW, Ong GB. The treatment of second degree haemorrhoids by injection, rubber band ligation, maximal anal dilatation and haemorrhoidectomy: a prospective clinical trial. Aust NZ J Surg. 1981;51(5):458-62.

Buchmann P, Babotai I. Why do patients with haemorrhoids benefit from Lords procedure. In; Givel J, Saegesser F, editors. Coloproctology, 1984. Newyork: Springer-Verlag; 1984: 166-168.

Mortensen PE, Olsen J, Pedersen IK, Christiansen J. A randomized study on hemorrhoidectomy combined with anal dilatation. Dis Colon Rectum. 1987;30:755-7.

Konsten J, Baeten CG. Hemorrhoidectomy vs. Lord's method: 17-year follow-up of a prospective, randomized trial. Dis Colon Rectum. 2000;43(4):503-6.